updated: Attacks across UK


by Sunny
29th June, 2007 at 3:31 pm    

Not much has been revealed about who planted the car bomb in central London early this morning.
BBC News online has some pictures from the area. A bit obvious to point this out but I think it’s worth saying that whoever did this planned an indiscriminate act of mass-murder rather than making some elaborate political point.

Updated: Have changed the title of this topic to reflect the attack today in Glasow. What saddens me is also that regular commenters here cannot help descending into making smart-arse remarks at each other for little particular reason. If a bunch of progressive readers of a progressive blog cannot help attacking each other, what hope is there for the rest of this country?

Update 2: It’s too early to speculate how the two attacks are related but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were more copycat killers.

Update 3: Worth reading, Hassan Butt – My appeal to fellow Muslims.
Meanwhile, US air strikes have killed over 80 civilians in Afghanistan.

Update 4: I have some sympathy for Josh Freedman Berthoud‘s warning on using the phrase ‘Asian looking men’. They did the same with Charles De Menzes and look how that turned out.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs






217 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs


  1. StrangelyPsychedelique — on 29th June, 2007 at 3:38 pm  

    T’was PETA, objecting to the use of the name ‘Tiger Tiger’ for a club venue.

    “Not in my name!” cried Sher Khan as he devoured a freshly killed stray bull…

  2. lithcol — on 29th June, 2007 at 3:44 pm  

    I wonder why the MCB have just issued a statement regarding the new London bomb? Do they know something the rest of us don’t? Would be nice to know.

    OK, it appears it was targeted at nightclub goers and we know that fundamentalist Muslims don’t like alcohol and half naked meat ( immodestly dressed women ). But hey, a lot of people I know who have a muslim background like a fun night out. Some Christians I know don’t like people enjoying themselves in this way.

    Why the kneejerk response by the MCB?

  3. Jagdeep — on 29th June, 2007 at 3:54 pm  

    God Help Us from these satans.

  4. Roger — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:01 pm  

    “I wonder why the MCB have just issued a statement regarding the new London bomb?”

    Perhaps because people like you post posts like that, Lithcol.

  5. Jagdeep — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:06 pm  

    I think it’s worth saying that whoever did this planned an indiscriminate act of mass-murder rather than making some elaborate political point.

    Sunny, you rarely make me smile or laugh with ineptitude but thanks for pointing this out for us — I had my suspicions that it might have been an elaborate protest against the appointment of former CBI chief Sir Digby Jones as trade promotion minister.

    Who’d have thunk they were planning indiscriminate slaughter of dancing infidel sluts?

  6. Jagdeep — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:11 pm  

    Hurry up and show us the CC TV pictures of the alienated young man who ran away from the nail-gas-petrol car bomb. We need to find out what we did to force him to carry out this act, and alienating him.

    You know, they’ve done a goo djob of stopping some of these plots by these motherfcukers but this just shows that one day they’ll get through. And we’re going to have to be ready for that — the act itself and the aftermath.

    We need to start drafting apologies to various cheese and onion people for alienating them into killing us.

  7. lithcol — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:23 pm  

    People like me Roger. My Irish ( south ) partner was really pissed off at IRA bombs etc in the UK. Just a small group of murderous fanatics but most Brits didn’t condemn all the Irish.

    Currently the only people likely to attack targets such as nightclubs are gangland figures or religious fundamentalists. Of the later, Islamacists have a track record for indiscriminate killing.

    Have Brits turned against Muslims in great numbers and condemned them all? I think not. To that extent the attempt by misguided fundamentalist Muslims has not and will not influence the behaviour of most Brits to those of a Muslim persuasion.

    We don’t as yet know what group or individuals are responsible. Perhaps the MCB cognisant that they may turn out to be Muslims wish to ameliorate any backlash. No need, there wasn’t one after the London train bombing in which people of all religions and none and races where killed and maimed , and there won’t be one now.

  8. Roger — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:48 pm  

    By “people like you”, Lithcol, i meant people who say things like “Do they know something the rest of us don’t? Would be nice to know.”
    You are mistaken in saying that “Currently the only people likely to attack targets such as nightclubs are gangland figures or religious fundamentalists.”. The most recent attack on a similar place was actually carried out by a racist gay-hater. The fact that you forgot that does suggests you don’t want to know something the rest of us do know and explains why the M.C.B. feels they have to speak out quickly.

  9. sonia — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:49 pm  

    oh oh i suppose everyone will get paranoid because july is fast approaching and 2 year anniversary and all that stuff. could all bombers just fuck off please whoever they are! we want to have a peaceful summer thanks

  10. bananabrain — on 29th June, 2007 at 4:53 pm  

    i think it may have had something to do with our new prime minister, actually. “remember us? now we’re your problem, not tony’s.”

    i understand the club was hosting a women-only night, which is fairly ironic considering what these guys think about mixed dancing.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  11. lithcol — on 29th June, 2007 at 5:18 pm  

    Roger I am sorry I didn’t cover all the deranged dingbats. Indeed there are individuals who have their own missions of hate. I merely wished to point out the main protagonists. You cannot deny that the MCB, given its fall from grace, could be predicted to issue the statement that they did to curry favour with the establishment.

    The perpetrator(s) may well belong to a fundamentalist Muslim group. This in no way stigmatises the majority of people of an Islamic background in this country or any other. The main sufferers from this type of indiscriminate attack are actually other Muslims. Not in this country of course.

    Perhaps the Muslim individuals I know who enjoy a good night out are not good Muslims and deserve whatever is coming to them according to some. Sounds like my old Sunday school teacher who was always going on about sin. Soon got over that.

    Of more concern to me with teenage children is the outbreak of mindless murderous violence that appears to be on the increase in the Capitol.

  12. Clairwil — on 29th June, 2007 at 6:55 pm  

    Well I’m just bloody relieved disaster was averted.
    Fingers crossed they track the lunatics responsible whatever their grievance,down swiftly.

    ‘i understand the club was hosting a women-only night, which is fairly ironic considering what these guys think about mixed dancing.’

    I think ‘dancing slags’ are fair game to these nutters whoever’s watching.

  13. j0nz — on 29th June, 2007 at 7:36 pm  

    Annoyed atheists perhaps?

    It’s probably just a bunch of loner weirdos, a convert or two to islam, who have been ‘radicalised’ by 9/11 or palestine, or serving in mcdonalds, or whatever, frenzied up on Omar Bakri infidel hating podcast wankfests.

    Freaks.

  14. leon — on 29th June, 2007 at 7:55 pm  

    [Former] BNP members? It’s not like it would be the first time a fascist has used a nail bomb…

  15. El Cid — on 29th June, 2007 at 8:11 pm  

    Define political point

  16. leon — on 29th June, 2007 at 8:19 pm  

    Looks like one now, just been confirmed that the other car found in Hyde Park had a similar device…not good news as there may be more but the bigger question is, assuming this was a coordinated terrorist action, how did it not get picked up by the intelligence services?

  17. raz — on 29th June, 2007 at 8:38 pm  

    One thing that strikes me is how unprofessional the terrorists operating in this country are. Most of their bombs are homemade and often don’t work properly, and the terrorists seem amateur and incompetent. Even the 7/7 bombs were fairly crude devices. The ones in India, Pakistan, Iraq etc are often heavily armed, have access to military grade explosives and detonators, and seem to have extensive combat and explosives training (witness the carnage that IED’s have wreaked against heavily armoured US vehicles in Iraq). We are damn lucky that terrorists operating here have neither the resources nor the expertise to carry out their motivations to the full extent.

  18. ZinZin — on 29th June, 2007 at 8:42 pm  

    We are damn lucky that terrorists operating here have neither the resources nor the expertise to carry out their motivations to the full extent.

    That not reassuring is it raz?

  19. j0nz — on 29th June, 2007 at 9:00 pm  

    OK leon…sure BNP members!

    How much do you want to bet as the ’cause’ was not white supremacism but a different kind of supremacism altogether, namely islamist?

    You have clearly given no thought whatosever to your comment. Why would former BNP members want to blow up hundreds of white women in a nightclub?

    Put your thinking cap on mate. Unless of course your a suggesting conspiracy, like many elements on the left and within muslim circles?

    “assuming this was a coordinated terrorist action, how did it not get picked up by the intelligence services?”

    LOL. Typical. The very people who criticise and oppose the police and security services anti-terrorist efforts at every possible opportunity STILL blame the security services for NOT thwarting earlier!

    I’ll bet you anything you like.

  20. j0nz — on 29th June, 2007 at 9:03 pm  

    Furthermore, we know that plots by white far-right extremist groups are relatively easy to thwart because you have full co-operation within the ‘community’ and infiltration is much easier.

  21. j0nz — on 29th June, 2007 at 9:14 pm  
  22. leon — on 29th June, 2007 at 9:20 pm  

    Oh wait, I just remembered, j0nz is a prick and not worth wasting time with! Phew, for a minute there I nearly took him seriously…

  23. j0nz — on 29th June, 2007 at 9:26 pm  

    Ad-hominen attacks. Sure sign the other person is a losing. Have a good night mate. :)

    Dont let the BNP members bite ;)

  24. lithcol — on 29th June, 2007 at 9:56 pm  

    Where has all this BNP crap come from? Are BNP members burning effigies of Muhammad on the streets? I think not. If they did I would expect them to be arrested.

    This current outrage will be dealt with and anyone who thinks that it can be used as an excuse to attack Muslims and their institutions in this country should think again.

  25. El Cid — on 29th June, 2007 at 10:28 pm  

    what a rubbish thread

  26. El Cid — on 29th June, 2007 at 10:29 pm  

    i’m referring to the comments it has spawned, of course

  27. douglas clark — on 29th June, 2007 at 11:03 pm  

    jOnz,

    Y’know mate, you are the petrol on the fire. Don’t you comment over on Harry’s Place?

    Until we know who was responsible, you are speculating. And in a most inflammatory manner.

    Tit.

  28. Puffy — on 30th June, 2007 at 12:38 am  

    For what it’s worth (and I bet not much, the usual conspiracist nuts emerging in due course) from what i know at 0015…

    - #1 was clearly aimed at “slags”
    - #2 @ Park Lane presumably was too until it was towed away (how English)?
    - When AQ fails – ie, Ministry of Sound, WTC 1993 (?) – it will repeat until it suceeds
    - this is interesting because it exposes the “lie” of it all being about Iraq. This is far more philosophically “pure”. This is no more about Iraq than 9/11 was – this is about how “we”, ie the West and that includes most of you Picklers, live
    - and fcuk the conspiracists. The clear ideological direction indicates it was not MIBloody5

    Sorry, but I thought I would just get that in now.

  29. lithcol — on 30th June, 2007 at 12:58 am  

    Puffy,

    It is happening everywhere. There is thriving cultural flowering in Pakistan as in many other parts of the so called Muslim world. What is the response of religious fundamentalists? Intimidation, prohibition and bloody murder.

    Unfortunately the other great strand of Abrahamic faith is trying to reassert itself on the world stage as being the only true way, Roman Catholicism. Not to mention various evangelical sects. Not much violence yet but you never know.

    Then of course there is militant Hinduism and various other groupings who would like us to subscribe to their world view.

    Crazy world, but then hasn’t it always been the case.

  30. douglas clark — on 30th June, 2007 at 1:01 am  

    Puffy, re post 30.

    No it doesn’t. It is speculation, so far, on your part I mean.

    Let us assume for a moment that you are right.

    That nutjob Islamists did this.

    So what?

    We already know that these folk need to be hunted. And that we will do.

  31. El Cid — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:19 am  

    is this really ‘inside the mind of a bomber’ journalism or a warped liberal-left agenda? those on the right need not reply — we already know your views.
    http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2723249.ece

  32. Bijna — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:22 am  

    The neighbors of the terrorists will tell us
    that the terrorists are actually nice people.
    Arrest all nice people!

  33. Katy Newton — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:51 am  

    El Cid – I’m really not sure what to make of that. Are they insinuating that Tiger Tiger deserved to be bombed because it’s a bit sleazy?

  34. Roger — on 30th June, 2007 at 9:22 am  

    No, Katy, it looks as if it insinuates people with the bad taste to go to a night club that’s a bit sleazy and get drunk deserve to be bombed literally as well as metaphorically.

    Jonz and Lithcol: BNP members and exBNP members have a history of stocking explosives or trying to blow up people they disapprove of. They may not be the most likely candidates here- the bombs are a different type to Copeland’s- but thay are not automatically free of all suspicion when a bomb is reported.

    I wonder if- and hope that- one way the intelligence services is dealing with bomb threats is by deliberately posting or hacking recipes for bombs on the internet so that they don’t actually work.

  35. Zak — on 30th June, 2007 at 11:44 am  

    If it’s the UBL whackos, it’s a bit disturbing because this is a significant departure from their MO..it seems more like an application of Iraq style tactics of IED’s overseas. Something similar to the IRA and other “insurgency” styole groups but with the intentional targetting of civilians.

  36. TheFriendlyInfidel — on 30th June, 2007 at 12:49 pm  

    Lets hope that incidents like this help convince the people that counter terrorism acts are necessary and not victimizing of any particalar groups.

    The threat is real, sometimes we seem to forget this.

    TFI

  37. douglas clark — on 30th June, 2007 at 1:10 pm  

    Zak,

    Did Al Quaida not claim responsibility for the Bali bombing, which was a night club IIRC?

  38. leon — on 30th June, 2007 at 2:21 pm  

    I wonder if- and hope that- one way the intelligence services is dealing with bomb threats is by deliberately posting or hacking recipes for bombs on the internet so that they don’t actually work.

    I’ve often thought this, if I were them it’s what I’d do…

  39. Don — on 30th June, 2007 at 3:06 pm  

    I seem to remember that during the IRA bombing campaigns the intelligence services would leak that they had cracked how to dismantle complicated bombs, hoping that bomb makers would blow themselves up trying to add more refinements.

  40. soru — on 30th June, 2007 at 3:51 pm  

    Yeah, they are trying to keep it a secret that nitroglycerine only works properly if you warm it to 60C then shake it.

  41. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:11 pm  

    Terrorist attack on Glasgow airport — looks like an attempted suicide car bombing gone wrong — no reported casualties, two men apprehended, one of them ran out of the car on fire

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6257194.stm

  42. j0nz — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:33 pm  

    Thanks Jagdeep.

    two men of “asian” origin. Buddhist perhaps?

    Not BNP members then Leon and douglas “in a most inflammatory manner” clark???

    Inflammatory is hoping that the attacks are white bnp members when clearly it’s alqaeda inspired.

    :)

    What a vicious lying bunch some of you still are. Toodle pip!

    I really can’t understand the mentality of certain commentors, never will.

    I have just written a draft manifesto (should go someway to explain what a “prick” I am!)

    http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2007/06/achtung-infidels.html

  43. Muzumdar — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:41 pm  

    Buddhist perhaps?

    This is quite clearly the work of Jain Monks and their cohorts.

    Fed up of kilt wearing, work shy and, most importantly, haggis munching Scots, the Jains have just had enough.

    (Allegedly).

    Que the Jain Council of Britain (JCB) issuing a statement of condemnation.

  44. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:43 pm  

    BBC News said one of the men ran out of the car on fire and started fighting with members of the public who then knocked him out. His mate (who was not on fire) got knocked out by the public too before the cops got him. One of the ‘alienated youths’ was described as smouldering and tried to throw petrol everywhere from a canister. Now that really is inflammatory.

    I’ve been saying for some time that they will start attacking places outside London. For some reason I keep having an image in my mind of them attacking Broad Street in Birmingham or some place in Manchester.

    I hope Anas is OK in Glasgow, he could give his views to the media up there.

  45. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:45 pm  

    ‘I have just written a draft manifesto (should go someway to explain what a “prick” I am!)’

    Good Lord two failed car bomb attacks in London, Glasgow Airport attacked and Jonz authors a ‘prick’ manifesto!

    I don’t mind admitting I’m fucking terrified. Is there is anyone sane left in Britain?

  46. Muzumdar — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:47 pm  

    Probably the most tragic thing to come out of this is the fact that Scotland is seemingly on its way to independence under the auspices of the democratically elected SNP – who are vehemently anti-Iraq War….(allegedly).

  47. Muzumdar — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:50 pm  

    I don’t mind admitting I’m fucking terrified

    Try being brown and having to go into central London to work tonight.

    Not only will there be the possibility of a tube/nightclub/bar etc near me being blown up, but I will, no doubt, be stared at suspiciously, and possibly verbally abused, by every punk without a brain (that’s the majority of people).

    Thanks Muslims. (Allegedly).

  48. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:54 pm  

    ‘I’ve been saying for some time that they will start attacking places outside London. For some reason I keep having an image in my mind of them attacking Broad Street in Birmingham or some place in Manchester.’

    Yes I’m surprised there hasn’t been some sort of attack outside London before now.

  49. Zak — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:56 pm  

    #37 DC: True, obviously it remains to be seen who has plotted the attack and thankfully this attack didn’t come to fruition.

    The Bali attack was part of the so called franchise groups that launch attacks. Groups which take AQ & UBL as sources of “inspiration” but not much else. A fall out of the Afghanistan conflict and Iraq war is the fragmentation of what was essentially an Arab movement initially.

    It’s now branched out and breeds in the vacuum in states where the gov’s approach is excessive. In the past whereas those groups would have fought a low level insurgency against the state they lived in, that has changed. They now follow the warped AQ belief that there is no point fighting the state because they exist only with western support and the Muslim public apathy ergo the target should be maximum western civilian deaths and terror. Trigger a disproportionate backlash from the west and then feed on the local Muslims feeling of being singled out.

  50. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:57 pm  

    Just a matter of time Clairwill. Sad to say, but we have to mentally prepare ourselves for horrors that are yet to come, the horror of the act, and the aftermath.

  51. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 5:59 pm  

    ‘Try being brown and having to go into central London to work tonight.

    Not only will there be the possibility of a tube/nightclub/bar etc near me being blown up, but I will, no doubt, be stared at suspiciously, and possibly verbally abused, by every punk without a brain (that’s the majority of people).’

    I can’t say I envy you that prospect much at all Muzamdar.

  52. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:06 pm  

    I can’t say I envy you that prospect much at all Muzamdar.

    Welcome to being brown in Britain in 2007 Clairwill. You don’t know how lucky you are to be white sometimes.

  53. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:08 pm  

    And yes, I put the primary blame for that situation on these motherfcuking scum of the earth terrorists and their ideological extremists in the ghettoes and everywhere else where they sneer and fart their fascism. Including their fellow travellers and apologists wherever they come from.

  54. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:23 pm  

    #53
    Spot on Jagdeep still it would help if the idiots that seem to think it is their job to police the nation by abusing random brown members of the public would get it into their heads that division and fighting is exactly what the terrorists hope to bring about.

    I’ve a feeling the reaction to this is going to be pretty bad.

  55. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:24 pm  

    Sorry that should be #54

  56. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:37 pm  

    I’ve a feeling the reaction to this is going to be pretty bad

    Imagine what it will be like when they succeed. We could well be talking about hundreds of people dying.

    This is what I mean when I say that we need to mentally and intellectually prepare ourselves for this.

    And I mean on this blog too, which will probably be a point of interest for many people amongst the media and in the public too. I fear for my immediate and extended family first of all because of these fascist terrorists, the racist abuse and even violence they may be subjected to in the aftermath, and in the kind of society my children will be living in afterwards.

  57. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 6:41 pm  

    ‘division and fighting is exactly what the terrorists hope to bring about.

    No they don’t. They couldn’t give a monkeys about the social repercussions for anyone.’

    I would have thought that they woyld regard a lot of angry, alienated young men who feel excluded from wider society as very helpful to achieving their long term aims.

  58. bikhair — on 30th June, 2007 at 7:35 pm  

    Clairwell,

    Please dont be decieved by Muzumdar. He doesnt deserve your pity. His concern isnt about innocent people like himself being victimized by the blacklash that this foiled act of terrorism may cause. As a non Muslim Asian male he just wants it to be confined to Muslims only. Man, woman, and or child, just get your Asians right, he thinks.

    It is for this reason that I hope he finds it even harder to hook up with an english girl tonight when he goes out.

  59. bikhair — on 30th June, 2007 at 7:39 pm  

    Jegdeep,

    “Welcome to being brown in Britain in 2007 Clairwill. You don’t know how lucky you are to be white sometimes.”

    Oh shut up! You dont know how lucky you are not to be an Iraqi or a woman from Zimbabwe whose life expectancy is like in the early 40s.

  60. Anas — on 30th June, 2007 at 7:40 pm  

    I hope Anas is OK in Glasgow, he could give his views to the media up there.

    No, Jagdeep I wasn’t one of the men in the jeep.

  61. ZinZin — on 30th June, 2007 at 7:51 pm  

    This is turning into Anas bashing or bullying. End it now.

  62. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 7:55 pm  

    Oh shut up! You dont know how lucky you are not to be an Iraqi or a woman from Zimbabwe whose life expectancy is like in the early 40s

    Phew! Thanks for pointing that out!

  63. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 7:59 pm  

    Bikhair,
    Having read comment #61 I take your point. Though he obviously doesn’t deserve to be physically or verbally abused. I think you’re being a bit hard on Jagdeep. He wasn’t arguing that British Asains are the most hard done by people in the world. I think he’s right to be concerned about the repercussions.

  64. Don — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:02 pm  

    Average mental age of this thread just dropped to about six. Wonder how that happened.

  65. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:03 pm  

    Thanks Clairwill! Last time, after 7/7, I had an uncle who was beaten up after objecting to some people lobbing racist abuse at him — my harmless 58 year old uncle.

  66. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:06 pm  

    ‘Anas
    Your ideology promotes genocide, slavery, rape and cold blooded murder. Your the Nazi.’

    Good Lord I had no idea our Anas was so naughty!

    Seriously though people can we stick to the point rather than hurling abuse.

  67. inders — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:09 pm  

    Isn’t there some theory about how long a discussion can last on the internet without Hitler or the Nazi’s bring brought into it ?

  68. Chairwoman — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:10 pm  

    “Welcome to being brown in Britain in 2007 Clairwill. You don’t know how lucky you are to be white sometimes.”

    That’s sad, Jagdeep, I’m sorry you feel like that. My mother sometimes used to say that British (she meant white of course) Christians didn’t know how lucky they were not to be Jewish.

    I feel that the perpetrators of these outrages take a particular delight in not only destroying their “foes”, but also in the confusion and mistrust they’re creating.

    Well that was trite and obvious. Sorry. Too fed up to be original.

  69. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:14 pm  

    Jagdeep,
    That’s awful. Funny that the cowardly scum that carry out these attacks only seem to get violently angry with harmless folk.

  70. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:14 pm  

    It’s disconcerting Chairwoman, that’s all. Sure, I’d rather be here than be working as a goat herd woman in Sudan or Timbuktu like Bikhair does, but it annoys the hell out of me either way. Shouldnt be that way.

  71. Chairwoman — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:14 pm  

    Jagdeep – I’ve just read your #74.

    I hadn’t realised that this was such an advanced civilisation.

  72. ZinZin — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:15 pm  

    Godwins law, Inders, find out more at wiki.

  73. Chairwoman — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:16 pm  

    Sorry should have been #65.

  74. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:18 pm  

    Chairwoman — it’s part of the ambience of our lives now. It’s always in the back of your mind when something like this happens, after the relief that nobody has been hurt. Life goes on but feelings are altered in subtle ways. Not how I want my kids to grow up, thinking like that.

  75. bikhair — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:23 pm  

    Jagdeep,

    In that case I offer my apologies.

  76. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:23 pm  

    ‘Yes, you are very much a Queen.’

    Are you implying our Bikhair is a homosexual? I’m sure she’ll be as surprised as the rest of us by this extraordinary revelation!

  77. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:25 pm  

    No need to apologise Bikhair, my friend.

  78. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:25 pm  

    Please note that the post above has been updated.

  79. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:28 pm  

    What saddens me is also that regular commenters here cannot help descending into making smart-arse remarks at each other for little particular reason.

    Simple — personal and generalised abuse of interactors and their background on a consistent and malicious basis, leading to a spoiling of the atmosphere and general nastiness and derailing of threads can be nipped in the bud when you identify the source of the personal aggressiveness and abuse. It’s your house, your party, your rules.

  80. bikhair — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:35 pm  

    Jagdeep,

    “Sure, I’d rather be here than be working as a goat herd woman in Sudan or Timbuktu like Bikhair does…”

    :) This is the second time someone has called me a goat herder.

  81. Clairwil — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:38 pm  

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6257194.stm

    The BBC website has an ‘unconfirmed’ report that the Royal Alexandra hospital has been evacuated. Anyone know anything?

  82. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:41 pm  

    This is the second time someone has called me a goat herder

    You know, for what it’s worse, Sudanese goat herding women look very noble, I saw them on the Discovery Channel :-)

  83. Chairwoman — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:43 pm  

    bikhair – Do you herd on the Upper West Side? :-)

  84. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:44 pm  

    worse = worth duhhh

    +++

    You can watch BBC News 24 channel online Clarwill

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/

    But I havent heard them mention anything on the hospital evacuation yet.

  85. Chairwoman — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:48 pm  

    Nothing on Sky News, Clairwil.

  86. A Councillor writes — on 30th June, 2007 at 8:55 pm  

    It’s (the hospital) been mentioned here on ZDF but they have nicked it from Sky News, along with the country going onto highest levels of alert. I suppose I’d better check in even earlier to get back to the UK tomorrow.

    This means more pain for everyone, people will have to endure even more hassle to fly, which will cause some temper tantrums during the holiday season. Muslims will get hassled undeservedly, other Asians will get hassled by the ignorant. I have no doubt that when I get back I will have the usual delightful emails from the BNP supporters in my ward.

    I leave you with one thought, given the way airport and airline security is reactive, just be glad Richard Read was the shoe bomber not the underpant bomber.

  87. Expat Brit (glad i left) — on 30th June, 2007 at 9:37 pm  
  88. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 10:03 pm  

    Clairwill apparently the hospital was evacuated when they found a suspect device on the body of the man.

  89. Bijna — on 30th June, 2007 at 10:04 pm  

    > As a non Muslim Asian male he just wants it to be
    > confined to Muslims only. Man, woman, and or child,
    > just get your Asians right, he thinks.

    I agree. Its probably Pakistani again, so lets call it what it is.

  90. Riz — on 30th June, 2007 at 10:05 pm  

    A lighter look at terrorism … I offer the following deep and insightful observations:

    * When the first two cars were found, sterling actually rallied on the day and the FTSE posted a healthy gain. I wonder if the markets will put in a similarly robust performance on Monday’s open.
    * If this terrorism business carries on, it may be more difficult for brown skins such as myself to secure employment, not that I am trying.
    * Gordon Brown’s emergency address: Couldn’t they find an alternative term to ‘vigilence’. The Bank of England and European Central Bank have used this term endlessly in warning of their alertness to signs of rising inflation. Only market heads will know what I am talking about here.
    * More on Gordon Brown’s emergency address: Was he talking from number 10? If so, they really need to change their wallpaper: horrible, wide, vertical red stripes.
    * These terrorist activities surely lessen my odds of ever securing membership of a traditional, stuffy golf club, at least at the margin. I realise this long-term goal is more of a fantasy, especially considering the state of my golf game (a poor short game, and no long game to speak of).

  91. Muzumdar — on 30th June, 2007 at 10:16 pm  

    Its probably Pakistani again

    No, we musn’t say that, especially when my ‘Jain Monk’ theory hasn’t been ruled out.

    (Central is empty today).

  92. Riz — on 30th June, 2007 at 11:02 pm  

    the Jain Monks can not be trusted … expect the unexpected

  93. Jagdeep — on 30th June, 2007 at 11:41 pm  

    CNN have reported that there is at least one body in the car of a third member of the gangs, and at least one of the men arrested was wearing a suicide belt. Looks like they were planning to make an entrance and blow themselves up in the terminal amongst passengers.

  94. Ravi Naik — on 30th June, 2007 at 11:46 pm  

    This thread is depressing. Fuck it, I am tired of feeling like a potential victim just because I am brown. If there are repercussions, let them come.

    People are such cowards. Terrorism? These people are criminals, dumb criminals plain and simple. They deserve the maximum penalty under the law, including everyone involved in the planning, and those who knew and stayed silent.

    My take on this is that everything is going back to normal in one week’s time, if there’s no other incident.

    Cheer up everyone.

  95. Chairwoman — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:10 am  

    Jagdeep – Apparently the man who was in flames was found to be wearing a suicide belt when examined in hospital, which is why it was partially evacuated.

    That must be something to do with Clairwil’s question earlier, but I didn’t catch the hospital’s name.

  96. Fred — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:12 am  

    The good old sense of British humour isn’t lost!

    “I had seen him and the other man get out of the car. The flames were burning through his clothes. Police were telling everybody to get back.

    “Some people who were close by shouted “let him burn”.

    From Two held as blazing jeep crashes into British airport in ‘terror strike’

    How do you like your Wannabe Islamic suicide bomber rare, medium, or well done?

  97. Chairwoman — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:12 am  

    Ravi – We’re all potential victims, because there are lunatics out there who think that killing a few people will affect government policy.

    But I agree, being brown exacerbates things.

  98. Muzumdar — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:19 am  

    Damn. My suspicions of the Jain Monks are, sadly, unfounded.

    Having watched the latest instalment of BBC News24 it has been confirmed that members of a certain community originating on the Arabian Peninsula were responsible.

    I know, I know, you just wouldn’t think it of them. They are normally such lovely people…..

    Ravi Naik

    My take on this is that everything is going back to normal in one week’s time, if there’s no other incident.

    After 9/11 it was pretty bad. It then got better. 7/7 made it worse. It then got a bit better again. Now we have this ‘double London to Glasgow wammy’.

    I think ‘normality’ is a long way off.

    The deeply pessimistic view of ‘Asians’ – why do they have to call Muslims that? – that the white man has are only going to get more pessimistic. The staring, the snarling, the pointing, the sniggering, the abuse, the attacks, the murders, it’s all going to get a lot worse.

    This won’t really affect Muslims that much though. They generally don’t have jobs, so they don’t have to travel during rush hour, like we do. They live in ghettos, so they don’t really interact with white folk, like we have to….

  99. Muzumdar — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:22 am  

    How do you like your Wannabe Islamic suicide bomber rare, medium, or well done?

    I do hope his ‘little friend’ wasn’t burned off. Just imagine going all the way to paradise, 72 virgins waiting there, voluptuously licking their lips, and you have nothing to work with…poor bugger.

  100. Don — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:27 am  

    Muzumdar,

    ‘…the snarling, the pointing, the sniggering, the abuse,…’

    Well, just stop doing it, then.

  101. Random Guy — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:37 am  

    This is f**ing horrible. I cannot believe this has happened so close to where I am, still processing it tbh. I am so glad that no one was hurt and that these morons messed up. Here is hoping that the security ppl do as good a job as they have up here in Edinburgh to secure airports and any other targets in the days to come…

  102. soru — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:38 am  

    ‘making smart-arse remarks at each other for little particular reason’

    I think you will find under Gordon Brown’s Britishness agenda that that is now actually mandatory. Anyone falling behind in their quota of sarcasm and bitching may face a legal challenge to their citizenship status.

  103. lithcol — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:58 am  

    Seems to me Muzumdar that you may have more to fear from the friends of the racist murderous thugs who brutally killed Kriss Donald and now threaten the labour MP Mohammad Sarwar and his family.

    What are the Glaswegian plods doing letting this scum terrorize all and sundry. Scum are scum whatever their ethnic origin.

  104. clairwil — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:41 am  

    Well knowing Scots like I do what with being one and having lived here all my life I don’t believe we are any more racist than any other part of the UK. Most middle class Scots tend to be left leaning liberals in their outlook and against racism. That’s not to deny racism does occur but it is no worse here than anywhere else and I’d be astonished if you could prove otherwise.

    At least when your spouting your ignorant bigoted lies in our direction it gives the Muslims a break.

  105. Soso — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:48 am  

    Oh shut up! You dont know how lucky you are not to be an Iraqi or a woman from Zimbabwe whose life expectancy is like in the early 40s.

    Or a women just about anywhere in the Muslim world, eh Bikhair? More women in Zimbabwe than in Afganistan can read, darlin’. Perhaps you could do something USEFUL for a change, and help the authorities flush out the extremists.

    Then again, you’re probably hoping that any reaction to, or questioning of, future Islamist atriocites ( and there will be further Islamist atrocities) can be deflected by cries of anti-brown “racism”. That way any much-neededed discussion of murderous religious ideologies and their propagators can be side-tracked into worthless and counter-productive musings about British “racism”.

    Islam means “peace”.

    Having read your comments at many other websites, it is obvious you’re little better than those behind these latest attempts.

    I fully understand the fears of non-Muslim South Asians and I sympathise with their plight; that of being associated with the “accomplishments” of religious nutcases simply because of skin-colour. It must be difficult, as well, having to endure the “islamist tax” of suspicious looks and the cold shoulders given by native Birtons in the aftermath of such events. I also understand why more and more non-Muslim south Asians are sick and tired of being lumped-in with the Islamists by silly, stupid Whites who SHOULD know better by now.

  106. Ms_Xtreme — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:52 am  

    The problem here in Glasgow is much bigger than you think. Pakistani gangs are rampant. The problem is some of the Mosques, but I don’t have the time or the energy to go into that now.

    Anyways, the scene at the airport was crazy. We were there earlier dropping off a mate and leaving when we heard about it. We returned but the roads were blocked off and people were running around. It was a mad house.

    Dude who got arrested was wearing a suicide belt by the looks of it. I’m sure more to come.

  107. bikhair — on 1st July, 2007 at 2:41 am  

    Soso,

    Youre such a yawn.

    “Or a women just about anywhere in the Muslim world, eh Bikhair? More women in Zimbabwe than in Afganistan can read, darlin’.”

    And I am sure everyone Muslim woman from Morocco to Malaysia are dying to trade places with literate Zimbabwean women who can read but die at 40.

    “Perhaps you could do something USEFUL for a change, and help the authorities flush out the extremists.”

    My pleasure. Next time I go to the toilet will it take one flush or two? LOL.

    “I fully understand the fears of non-Muslim South Asians and I sympathise with their plight; that of being associated with the “accomplishments” of religious nutcases simply because of skin-colour.”

    I fully understand and sympathise with all people who may have to suffer from or suffer due to actions like these anywhere in the world.

    Now you go and do something useful like grow a brain, a spine, and maybe a pair of testicles, Soso stupid!

  108. Tahir — on 1st July, 2007 at 3:51 am  

    Heard there was also an attemted bomb at the airport in Ibitza.

  109. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 8:01 am  

    it was a false alarm tahir.
    i was struck by the eye witness account from an airport worker:
    “He was on fire from head to toe and we tried to grab him but he was throwing punches shouting allah! allah!”
    i’d laugh if it weren’t a little scary. talk about being brainwashed into a frenzy. quite clearly, the saudi-funded preachers of hate are a legitimate target.
    actually i’m smiling now, it’s a bit surreal ennit? call it the blitz spirit.

  110. Expat Brit (glad i left) — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:03 am  

    There’s lots of erroneous claims being made about what was said and what was done so I’d be careful about promoting any of these unless you witnessed it first hand. Before I went to sleep last night I heard on the radio that they had found a suicide belt on him when they took him to hospital. And this morning I read: ‘Strathclyde Police had believed he was in possession of “a suspect device”, but it was later found not to be explosive.’

  111. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:13 am  

    Are you really glad you left?
    So how much UK tv do you watch? How many UK newspaper sites do you read? How come? :)

  112. Expat Brit (glad i left) — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:00 am  

    >>So how much UK tv do you watch? How many UK newspaper sites do you read? How come? :)

    Don’t watch tv, never have. Forced to rely on a couple of uk newspapers and blogs as I can’t speak German. I’m adamant to learn thou and it’s slowly improving. My French is pretty good but I’m in the German speaking part of Switzerland.

    >>Are you really glad you left?
    Yes, I’m glad that I left and so are the 1000′s of other British expats here.

  113. Bijna — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:22 am  

    > This won’t really affect Muslims that much though.
    > They generally don’t have jobs, so they don’t
    > have to travel during rush hour, like we do.
    > They live in ghettos, so they don’t really interact
    > with white folk, like we have to….

    > The problem here in Glasgow is much bigger
    > than you think. Pakistani gangs are rampant.

    The same problem are with Maroccans in the Netherlands.

    This gang, criminal, parisatic, violent, ubermensch behaviour is definately a muslim thing which effects all of Western Europe.

  114. Mash — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:40 am  

    I’m following the news closely here in the US. The news channels have been breathlessly covering the Glasgow attack and the heightened security level in the UK. However, hard news has been hard to come by. Most cable news here have devolved into wild speculation in the absence of new details.

    MSNBC is calling Gordon Brown “dour” because of his demeanor in his short statement about the Glasgow attack. I am not sure how else he was supposed to look given the subject matter he was covering.

  115. leon — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:55 am  

    I must admit that it was a bit surreal in its shortness but thinking about it I preferred it to Blair’s insincere performances. What we don’t need at a time like this is some messianic idiot all over the news blathering on about the need to take away freedoms left, right, and centre.

    A bit of restraint and praise for the emergency services is a calmer response and plays away from those criminals who are engaged in their phony war.

  116. justagal — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:09 am  

    Since 9/11, I have noticed an increased uptake of Hindu and Sikh religious symbols by members of those communities in an attempt, I believe, to disassociate themselves from Muslims. This behaviour (though I’m not condemming sincere display of religious symbols) smacks of cultural and racial supremacy, especially when it’s coupled with a rhetoric that would put the BNP to shame,actually compounds the siege/victim mentality that is a driving force in the commision of these acts of terror. If it could be argued that it’s Asians, as opposed to members of religious groups who were the target of persecution then it would be much easier to deal with the repercusiions by denouncing them as racist.

  117. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:09 am  

    You won’t get this detail in the broadsheets:

    “He was on fire. What clothes were left were sticking to his body and yet he was totally expressionless, as if he was in a daze or high on drugs. The guy was a giant and reminded me of the Incredible Hulk.

    “People began shouting and cursing him. Then somebody ran across and starting kicking the man. He was struggling but didn’t go down. Others joined in trying to grasp him and then the police and security staff rushed up and started spraying him with CS gas. That put him down but people were very angry and were still trying to kick him.

    “A second man came out of the Cherokee and began wandering around the front of the airport. He also looked as if he was in a trance but he was jumped on by the crowd. The police took hold of him and pulled him away.

    “It was terrifying, surreal, like a scene out of a science fiction movie.”

  118. Katy Newton — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:14 am  

    This behaviour (though I’m not condemming sincere display of religious symbols) smacks of cultural and racial supremacy

    Or in most cases it could just be an effort to avoid the increased racial abuse and attacks that will inevitably be meted out to anyone who looks as if they might be Muslim?

  119. leon — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:18 am  

    If the reasoning is to differentiate them from Muslims they’re fools. It wont work, it’ll be Muslims today and others tomorrow…do they really think that these racist fuckers actually care what religion a Brown skinned person belongs too??

  120. lithcol — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:20 am  

    Clairwil,

    I should have said a vicious criminal drug gang whose ethnic origin is Pakistani. Mr. Sarawar MP became a target because he helped in the extradition of their murderous colleagues from Pakistan so that they could face justice in this country.

    I thought you would be aware of the above. I am sorry if I inadvertently caused you any offence. As far as I am aware I do not spout ignorant bigoted lies. I leave that to racists such as the BNP.

  121. Laban Tall — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:25 am  

    Roger – re nightclub attacks :

    “The most recent attack on a similar place was actually carried out by a racist gay-hater”

    I think you’ll find there have been a large number of nightclub attacks since Mr Copeland went for a beer in the Admiral Duncan – mostly random shootings carried out by young men who’ve just been thrown out/turned away/otherwise disrespected by the door staff. Plus some that are straight gang/protection related.

  122. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:10 pm  

    Leon, who do mean when you say “these racist fuckers”?
    do you mean the few perpetrators of racist abuse/attacks or the many of broader UK/white society? I think you mean the former, but your instinctive responses sometimes make me wonder

    I don’t see any problem with sikhs/hindus wishing to differentiate themselves from moslems — you really think they give a shit about what racist white chav think? I mean, really, really? Or is it broader society ‘s views which matters to them? Is it really pride that motivates them, a wish to display their loyalty to the community they live while educating them on their culture, traditions, and symbols? if so, what’s the problem?
    ok, so it might seem divisive within the UK asian community by seeming to smack of racial/religious superiority but is that the paramount agenda? strikes me as an imported agenda.
    aren’t sikhs and hindu just doing what moderate/mainstream moslems are also trying to do/should be doing — isolate the jihadist chav?

  123. leon — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:27 pm  

    I meant the former.

  124. Sarah — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:49 pm  

    Have posted this elsewhere as well — just trying to remind people of some movements we should support.
    The East Timorese have been voting for the first time for a parliament. Theirs is the forgotten genocide– at least one third of them were killed (as was almost the entire ethnic Chinese community)by the Indonesian invasion and occupation from 1975-1999. Bin Laden did/does not forget them: he cited Australian – (hence the Bali bombing) and UN (calling Kofi Annan a war criminal for this and justifying the attack on UN HQ in Iraq and the murder of Sergio de Mela) support for their independence). BTW East Timor was never part of Indonesia–it was a Protuguese colony for over 300 years, Catholic,etc and never claimed by any Indonesian nationalist movement.
    The Indonesian war criminals who slaughtered hundreds of thousands have never been brought to justice; East Timor remains the poorest state in Asia and it is only the Australian liberal/left, a literal handful of hard-working activist Europeans and Americans who ever did anything. Thank God the left poseurs here in the UK dismissed the East Timorese resistance as ‘hopeless and not important.’
    Perhaps the fact that they rejected terrorism as a method, that they rejected any attacks on Indonesian civilian occupiers — because as Horta and Gusmao argued terrorism is not just wrong but ‘brutalises the people themselves’ made it unattractive to these ‘hard men of the left.’
    Throughout its faltering and fragile history, the Timorese have benefitted from leadership that has managed to pull people back from the brink of despairing and desparate descents into violence. But this occurs under the media and left’s radar – unless there is a moment of violence – which they then use to support their lack of support. Nothing in the press or broadcasting UK media today.
    So it goes.

  125. Bijna — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:53 pm  

    > You won’t get this detail in the broadsheets:
    Why dont you post your source?

  126. leon — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:56 pm  

    Interesting post, my first understanding of the situation in East Timor came from the documentary about Noam Chomsky ‘Manufacturing Consent’ (well worth seeing). It had an interview with a small group in the US (I think) who were campaigning about it…depressing stuff but thankfully it showed the world isn’t full of ‘left poseurs’ and there are a great many harding working people who actually are trying to make a difference.

  127. Bijna — on 1st July, 2007 at 12:57 pm  

    > This behaviour (though I’m not condemming sincere
    > display of religious symbols) smacks of cultural
    > and racial supremacy,

    I agree that headscarfs aka “flags of islam”
    smack of “cultural and racial supremacy”.

  128. Katy Newton — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:00 pm  

    If the reasoning is to differentiate them from Muslims they’re fools. It wont work, it’ll be Muslims today and others tomorrow…do they really think that these racist fuckers actually care what religion a Brown skinned person belongs too??

    I don’t say it’s an effective strategy. I just took exception to the suggestion that brown non-Muslims who sport their own religious symbols are trying to set up some Asian version of the Hitler Youth…

  129. Ruby — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:33 pm  

    This behaviour (though I’m not condemming sincere display of religious symbols) smacks of cultural and racial supremacy, especially when it’s coupled with a rhetoric that would put the BNP to shame,actually compounds the siege/victim mentality that is a driving force in the commision of these acts of terror

    God almighty, I read some nonsense on here but this takes the biscuit. What about Muslims pushing their religions in peoples faces in the first place, asserting Islamic supremacy, and mouthing Islamic separatist rhetoric virtually unopposed by anyone for almost the last two decades? Why were people like you quiet about that? Even when it escalates to terrorism and murder? Why was nobody criticising the rise in Islamic separatist rhetoric and belief even in the mainstream Muslim discourse in Britain? Where were your principles then? What fatuous nonsense. So now Sikhs putting a khanda in their car is ‘pushing’ Muslims to blow up Glaswegians?

    What utter contemptible inverted fatuous nonsense.

  130. Clairwil — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:37 pm  

    lithcol,
    You haven’t caused me any offence at all! I was actually responding Muzumdars comment. Should have made that clearer. Sorry and yes I am aware of the situation with Mohammad Sarwar. I think you’re spot on.

  131. Ruby — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:42 pm  

    I just took exception to the suggestion that brown non-Muslims who sport their own religious symbols are trying to set up some Asian version of the Hitler Youth…

    Thank you Katy, I am so happy that you have expressed the utterly convoluted and obnoxious, cowardly and hypocritical reasoning of justagals rhetoric. She is honestly asserting that a Hindu or Sikh wearing a religious symbol around their wrist or neck or on their car dashboard is leading to a siege mentality amongst Muslims to the extent that they will be pushed towards violence, and it is on a par with the BNP. I actually think that it stinks of racism and contempt for Hindus and Sikhs if justagal is from a Muslim background, and it stinks of the worst kind of leftist self contempt and blindness to the extreme assertion of Islamic ‘pride’ that has been noticeable to everyone in the country white, Indian, black over the last ten years if she actually comes from an Indian background herself.

  132. Ruby — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:45 pm  

    I mean, what does it say about Muslims if they blow themselves up andhave a siege mentality just because Hindus or Sikhs do their own thing? Muslims siege mentality is self contained and self produced! Those Muslims who are like that are like that because the sky is blue! They create their own siege mentality. So add Hindus and Sikhs to the list of people provoking Muslims into extremism alongside Jews and decadent Whites. Everyone is to blame except Muslims themselves.

  133. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 1:56 pm  
  134. Ruby — on 1st July, 2007 at 2:08 pm  

    As for the creation of siege mentalities you would think that people trying to kill innocent children women and men by suicide bombing on the streets and transport systems of Britain for the last two years with a supremacist ideology comparable to nazism would create a siege mentality in everyone. But no, its all the Hindus and Sikhs fault, giving a siege mentality and forcing Muslims to have a siege mentality themselves.

    Say what you want about Sikhism and Hinduism, one thing they are not is supremacist towards those who dont follow their religions. They dont think anyone who is non Hindu and non Sikh is a lesser person simply because they dont follow Hindusim or Sikhism nor do they think anyone should convert, whoops, I mean ‘revert’ to their religion. That’s also a Muslim thing, with mass conferences on ‘dawah’, aggressive prosletysation mentalities, and a belief that anyone not Muslim is inferior and a slut or a kaffir. And thats more or less mainstream Muslim thinking. Very BNP like indeed. But no, its everyone elses fault, blame everyone else. And blowing people up isnt going to cause siege mentalities amongst anyone else is it?

  135. Explorer — on 1st July, 2007 at 2:17 pm  

    Terrorist suspects ‘not Scottish’

    A number of houses have been searched in Houston
    Two men arrested in Scotland in connection with the Glasgow Airport attack are not “home-grown terrorists”, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said.

    His comments followed searches of a number of homes in Neuk Crescent, Houston, Renfrewshire.

    Mr MacAskill said the suspects were not “born or bred” here but had lived in Scotland for a “period of time”.

    “For any suggestion to be made that they are home-grown terrorists is just not true,” he added.

    The airport, meanwhile, is operating a phased reopening and flights from Orlando and Ibiza have arrived.

    A departure was scheduled to leave at 0900 BST to Ibiza and passengers were being processed in terminal two, airport officials said.

    The reopening will be “extremely gradual”, the airport officials added.

    following Saturday’s incident police are now holding four people.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6258758.stm

  136. Explorer — on 1st July, 2007 at 2:21 pm  

    Say what you want about Sikhism and Hinduism, one thing they are not is supremacist towards those who dont follow their religions[Ruby]

    How about the RSS or their policies of burning Muslims to a crisp in sunny Gujarat?

    Oh what’s with “it’s a Muslim thing”? You were annoyed when someone mentioned the issue regarding Hindu and Sikh religious symbols and their unfair judgement of why the two groups are doing this but yet paint the whole Muslim community in the same light as HT….

  137. Ravi Naik — on 1st July, 2007 at 3:16 pm  

    “I don’t see any problem with sikhs/hindus wishing to differentiate themselves from moslems”

    You don’t have this dilemma, El Cid, because you are white, and you will never have to face what we are going through. But the looks of anxiety and distrust back in 7/7 made me, as a brown Catholic, think whether I should wear something that distinguishes me from moslems, like a cross.

    But I decided against that, because the message that I am sending is that muslims are terrorists, and for the virtue of not being muslim, I am not going to blow the train.

    Religion has absolutely no monopoly on good or bad deeds. However, we will only sort out this problem when we start dealing with moslems (and others) who preach hate against the West, with as much intensity as C18 and other neo-nazis. Muslim fundamentalism is the tool for the BNP and is far more effective than any white racist organization.

  138. Sunny — on 1st July, 2007 at 3:27 pm  

    But no, its all the Hindus and Sikhs fault, giving a siege mentality and forcing Muslims to have a siege mentality themselves.

    Ruby I think you’re misreading what is being said here. There is a difference between a Hindu and Sikh expressing their religious identity (which I find a bit silly with people of all religions, but anyway) and trying to say – ‘Hey, I’m a Hindu/Sikh, not a Muslim! If you want to beat them up don’t touch me!’.

    I wrote an article about how Hindu/Sikh groups exploited that after 9/11 here:

    http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1195

    Secondly, no one said that Sikhs/Hindus are inspiring Muslim seige mentality.

    That is not to say Hindus and Sikhs are not capable of it. You just have to read Sikh websites where they think Muslims or Hindus are out to get them, or Hindu reactions to when their own fanatics are exposed:
    http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1194

    It’s a common trait.

    In fact one of my more popular articles on AIM years ago was about religious seige mentality:

    http://www.asiansinmedia.org/news/article.php/television/808

  139. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 3:45 pm  

    I hear what you are saying Ravi, as my original post indicated. I know it’s arguably divisive and arguably treacherous to all past and present victims of Britain’s ‘Paki-bashing’ sub culture. And it’s true that I don’t face the dilemma you describe.
    But how much of what you and others sense and describe is paranoia? How much is pavlovian conditioning (the opposite of X,Y, and Z coming on here and blaming it all on Islam, full stop)? How can you be sure?
    Back in the ol’ 7/7 days, I recall Asian people on this site having a lot more empathy and sympathy for the fears of their non-Asian commuters. I remember getting off a tube once, about 9 months ago, because I didn’t like the look of the respectable big Asian guy with the rucksack reading the Telegraph next to me on my carriage. I guess that makes me a racist. And so it goes on and on and on.

  140. El Cid — on 1st July, 2007 at 5:07 pm  

    this deserves a thread on its own, although it would probably degenerate

    http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2115832,00.html

  141. bikhair — on 1st July, 2007 at 6:36 pm  

    El Cid,

    I coudlnt get past the title. I am a Muslim, why should I renounce terrorism? I am not a terrorist.

  142. Ayn — on 1st July, 2007 at 6:38 pm  

    Yes, you’re probably right. Renoucing terror?, Call to terrorists, to cause an explosion it would help to use a better oxidizer preferable of the class 4 type, for example Hydrogen Peroxide or ammonium permanganate. London and Glasgow air just doesn’t cut it no matter how polluted.

    You can tell these kids were born in the UK. No knowledge of basic chemisty.

  143. Don — on 1st July, 2007 at 7:46 pm  

    I liked the point someone made in the Observer, that the London car bombers choice of target was clearly motivated by loathing for a liberal approach to sexuality. So London responded with a Gay Pride march.

  144. Faisal Haque — on 1st July, 2007 at 7:47 pm  

    As I have pointed out on my blog, if Hassan Butt has funded terrorism why has he not been arrested and charged?

    I believe that the true purpose of Butt’s new found conversion is to instil fear in the masses so that they believe that there are tens of thousands of Muslims who are willing to become suicide bombers on the streets of Britain. This will strengthen the government’s global war on terror and allow it to continue to erode liberties through ever more draconian laws.

  145. Random Guy — on 1st July, 2007 at 8:11 pm  

    Just read the Hassan Butt article and as a muslim, I have to say how grossly offensive the suggestion that I have to ‘renounce’ terror is. Anyone with this attitude or opinion should just f**k right off as far as I am concerned. From the talkback, here is a statement that makes much more sense:-

    Quote:
    My plea to fellow Muslims: you must renounce terror

    May I rewrite this?

    My plea to all states: you must renounce killing, torture, fear mongering in the name of selfish economic and political advantage.
    My plea to all indivuals: you must renounce killing, torture, fear mongering in the name of revenge, testosterone venting, fortune earning, power plays and fun.

  146. Bijna — on 1st July, 2007 at 8:16 pm  

    > I coudlnt get past the title. I am a Muslim,
    > why should I renounce terrorism? I am not a terrorist.

    Because it is not odd to assume from a muslim that:
    1) he has read the Koran of which half of it preaches terrorism
    2) adores the prophet mohammed who was a terrorist

    The safe bet, knowing the above, is to assume that every muslim is a terrorist unless proven otherwise.

  147. Faisal Haque — on 1st July, 2007 at 8:36 pm  

    @Random Guy

    A better title would be:

    My plea to Bush, Blair, Brown et al.: you must renounce terror

    My plea to fellow Muslims: do not stoop to the level of Bush, Blair, Brown et al.

  148. Clairwil — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:05 pm  

    Bikhair & Random Guy
    I understand why you find the idea of being asked to renounce terrorism offensive but I wonder if a more pragmatic response might be beneficial.

    If I were to post an article here containing lies an inaccuracies about Islam, I’m sure you’d want to respond by setting me straight. In effect terrorists are saying that such attacks are a legitimate part of Islam. Where is the harm in speaking out and saying that they are not? Most UK citizens are not Muslim and don’t know a great deal about it as a religion. People are understandably frightened, if it’s within your power to offer a bit of reassurance then why not not do it?

    Various Scottish Muslims have spoken out

    http://www.midlothianadvertiser.co.uk/latest-scottish-news?articleid=2995891

    and I applaud them for doing so. Like it or not these things are being done in the name of Islam. Silence can look like like acceptance or support for such actions. It can certainly be presented as such by BNP bigots and the like.

    As I said I’m not unsympathetic to your position and I hope I’ve not caused either of you any offence but you only need to read some of the comments on this thread to see that acts like this can be exploited to portray all Muslims in a negative way. Why let terrorists or anti-Muslim bigots have the last word?

  149. Faisal Haque — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:14 pm  

    @Clairwil

    I think the point is that Muslims from across the political spectrum, from the Sufis to the political Islamists like MB/HuT, have made it very clear that these kind of attacks are not legitimate and have no religious basis.

    The problem that I have, is that why is no one talking about the ideology that has caused innumerable deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan?

    I don’t buy the mantra that we are dealing with people who just hate the West – that view is just too simplistic. Even OBL asked why AQ has not attacked Sweden if it were just an issue of hating the West.

  150. Refresh — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:24 pm  

    Sarah, I have never read such utter rubbish.

    If you want to know more about Timor then go read John Pilger. He was telling us over a decade ago about Suharto, about Australia and about US policy and actions. That is concerted action engineered in the US.

    Go get some facts, and then do us the courtesy of apologising for misleading Pickled Politics.

    Bijna, you are one repulsive character.

    Sunny why is Bijna allowed to post such vile rubbish?

    And the rest of you – why are you prepared to accept this vile facist?

  151. Sunny — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:35 pm  

    Sunny why is Bijna allowed to post such vile rubbish?

    Well, anyone can post rubbish. After that I can take the choice to delete it and you can make the choice to ignore it.

    Even OBL asked why AQ has not attacked Sweden if it were just an issue of hating the West.

    OBL isn’t stupid. He couches his crusades in ways that ordinary Muslims who may sympathise with his aims if not his actions can be persuaded. Sweden isn’t bombed because it does not stand in his way. It possesses no army to worry about. Whereas most Middle Eastern states depend heavily on the US for trade etc.

    If you want to really know if OBL and his comrades hate ‘the West’ (stupid term that it is anyway), then you only have to look at AQ’s general distate for democracy, for personal freedom of expression (how women choose to dress), for free unfettered speech and for its military and technological accomplishments.

    You have to start looking past words and into actions for not just people like Bush, but also people like OBL, Faisal.

  152. Bijna — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:38 pm  

    > Sunny why is Bijna allowed to post such vile rubbish?
    What rubbish?

  153. Refresh — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:42 pm  

    “Well, anyone can post rubbish. After that I can take the choice to delete it and you can make the choice to ignore it.”

    Somethings just can’t be ignored.

  154. lithcol — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:56 pm  

    Well yes bombs can’t be ignored, but hey irritating gobby shits can. It’s not as if he is going to jump out of your computer screen and do you an injury. Sunny will just deprive him from posting if he hogs the bandwidth.

    Looks as though the potential bombers are of middle eastern extraction with no ties to this country and probably few to their own.

  155. Sunny — on 1st July, 2007 at 9:57 pm  

    Somethings just can’t be ignored.

    Please stop being so immature. It’s a website and your life will carry on fine if you ignore idiotic comments as far as I’m aware. Maybe you should join the MCB given they share your way of doing things.

  156. Faisal Haque — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:00 pm  
  157. Refresh — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:01 pm  

    Sunny

    I am being immature?

    I point out something which I find deeply offensive, which was uncalled for and does not add to this thread other than degenerate not to forget derail and what do you do?

    Tell me to join the MCB.

    For goodness don’t regress to how you were a year or so ago. Keep moving forward.

  158. Elaine — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:06 pm  

    While I have no desire to underestimate how serious this all is, nor to undermine useful discussion, but …sometimes it is a useful dsitraction to look at how Muslim comedians elswhere are ‘managing’ such issues.
    I recommend the US Muslim comedian(Egyptian origin) Ahmed Ahmed. He offers a very good take on what it is like ‘flying while Muslim’ while also challenging ideas of victimhood –eg his piece on where Muslims rank in terms of hate crimes in the US. Subversive and wickedly funny…or at least I think so. Anyone else following his repetoire and career? Get a taste at http://www.ahmed-ahmed.com/

  159. bikhair — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:14 pm  

    Bijna,

    “he has read the Koran of which half of it preaches terrorism
    ” adores the prophet mohammed who was a terrorist”

    Please prove beyound a reasonable doubt that the above are true. Dont just assume that I will agree with you.

  160. bikhair — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:24 pm  

    Random Guy,

    The point of non-Muslims asking Muslims to denounce terrorism is to make us all feel some sort of responsibility.

    See, they can’t accuse all or most of us of planting bombs, for financial backing, etc. but so long as they dont see us in the streets dancing with signs opposing terrorism angrily, awfully, boldly, brutally, ferociously, forcefully, forcibly, frantically, frenziedly, frighteningly, furiously, hard, horribly, impetuously, irresistibly, madly, maleficiently, malevolently, malignly, mightily, monstrous, passionately, riotously, roughly, savagely, severely, stormily, tempestuously, terribly, threateningly, tigerishly, turbulently, uncontrollably, vehemently, venomously, viciously, violently and or wildly… than we are responsible.

    It then ceases to be about actual Muslim terrorist, but becomes about all Muslim peoples. What are the social and poltical consequences of that?

  161. Refresh — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:32 pm  

    “But I decided against that, because the message that I am sending is that muslims are terrorists, and for the virtue of not being muslim, I am not going to blow the train.”

    Ravi, I am with you completely. A principled stance is what is required. On all the issues pertaining to the situation here and globally.

    Anything less will give room to extremists on all sides.

    We have to split the issues and have a moral stand on each one.

  162. Clairwil — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:33 pm  

    lithcol,
    Did you see my comment #130?

  163. lithcol — on 1st July, 2007 at 10:54 pm  

    Clairwil,

    I did indeed and thank you. I will though apologise again because it is clear that you would be aware of Mr. Sarawars position and the criminal perpetrators involved.

    I would add that the police do have a difficult job, especially where minority group criminality is concerned. It does no good for the law abiding minorities if decisive action isn’t taken against these criminals because of fear of offending etc.

    Fortunately a grown up debate is now in progress, particularly in London, and the damage resulting from excess PC to minority communities is now being addressed.

  164. Refresh — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:24 pm  

    “First ‘Uncle Bob’, now this…(allegedly).”

    Coward!

  165. kepler — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:40 pm  

    Refresh:

    From Wikipedia:

    “Indonesia alleged that the East Timorese FRETILIN party, which received some vocal support from the People’s Republic of China, was communist. Fearing a Communist domino effect in Southeast Asia – and in the wake of its failed South Vietnam campaign– the United States, along with its ally Australia, supported the pro-Western Indonesian government’s actions despite Portugal being a founding member of NATO.

    An Indonesian invasion was launched over the western border on 7 December 1975″

    Or, to put it another way, Suharto wanted to colonize East Timor, and conned the U.S. and Australia by waving the threat of of a Communist state. No-one forced him to invade, and no-one forced Indonesia to rule so brutally. Again, according to Wikipedia:

    “A detailed statistical report prepared for the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor cited a lower range of 102,800 conflict-related deaths in the period 1974-1999, namely, approximately 18,600 killings and 84,200 ‘excess’ deaths from hunger and illness.[6] Since each data source used under-reports actual deaths, this is considered a minimum. Amnesty International estimated deaths at 200,000[7].”

    Perhaps you could actually give some details of what Pilger (that well-known historian) says, instead of just relying on the name.

    Or, maybe, you could apologize for “misleading Pickled Politics

  166. Clairwil — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:45 pm  

    Lithcol,
    The police do have a difficult job. That said, I have heard and bear in mind that this is only hearsay that there were two main strands of opinion within Strathclyde Police on tackling Asian gangs. The first that it was an ‘Asian problem’, confined to the Asian community and unless the complained in large numbers then why bother? The second was a fear of stirring up racial tension by being seen to victimise a particular community.

    To me both positions are inexcusable. There is nothing racist about fair application of the law, nor is it desirable to abandon minority communities to thug rule.

    I’d also point out that the southside gang problem is not exclusively Asian. Birds of a feather flock together.

  167. Refresh — on 1st July, 2007 at 11:45 pm  

    Kepler, with all its global assets the US is too easily duped, if we are to accept Wikipedia.

    In effect you have just verified what I had said.

    You should not accept the idea, just because someone may have a communist leaning that it would be ok to go have people killed. How many millions in Vietnam?

  168. Random Guy — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:14 am  

    The only pattern I see is an irritating little gobshite (you, Muzumdar) with a delusional take on reality…

    @Clairwil: If providing reassurances means ‘renouncing’ something I never declared then I will pass thanks. Are you saying that this is the only way people here will not feel threatened? If someone asks me I will set them straight about Islam and its stance on terrorism, but does this mean I should assume all Brits will assume I am a terrorist unless I go out of my way to tell them I am not. I mean what should I do? Buy a T-shirt with a logo saying MUSLIM: YES, TERRORIST: NO, FURTHER QUESTIONS PLEASE ASK?

    Sorry if I am coming across as too belligerent, but I think that renonuncing terrorism when I never declared it is a bridge too far. Other muslim posters here will know exactly what I mean. And also why the current discourse in the media and parliament is always pointedly implying that all muslims have done something wrong which they should apologise for. That suggestion earns the two fingered salute from me every time.

  169. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:15 am  

    Aaargh.

    1) *Of course* the U.S. was easily duped – they were paranoid about Communism back then.

    2) Vietnam, Cambodia, Nicaragua, etc, were inexcusable acts of amorality.

    3) But, what’s that got to do with East Timor ?

    3) Suharto *still* didn’t have to colonise East Timor, or rule it so brutally.

    4) Exactly what was incorrect in Sarah’s original (off-topic) post ?

    5) So, how on earth have I verified what you said ?

    6) Apologies to Sunny, etc, for continuing an off-topic thread.

  170. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:23 am  

    “The safe bet, knowing the above, is to assume that every muslim is a terrorist unless proven otherwise”

    I think it’s harmful for pickled politics to allow such comments to remain – over the long term it damages the blog’s credibility as a progressive site.

  171. Soso — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:29 am  

    It then ceases to be about actual Muslim terrorist, but becomes about all Muslim peoples. What are the social and poltical consequences of that?

    Glad you stated that because when Muslims anywhere in the world are “agressed” all Muslims reserve the right to feel aggrieved, assaulted and indignant.

    This is a two-way street, though.

    You see, if ALL Muslims have the right to feel aggrieved for an attack on even ONE muslim, then ALL muslims are in some sense responsable when even ONE muslim attacks scores of innocents.

    This reciprocity of community rights AND responsabilities makes perfect sense, except, of course, if one is imbued with a supremacist-tainted grievance mentality.

    Bikhair complains of media coverage of Muslims, but has nothing to say about the glaring fact that 95% of religious motivated terrorist attacks (2004-05) were carried out by Muslims.

    The proportion is so outlandish that even neutral and honest coverage of Muslim atrocities makes it appear the press are out “to get” Muslims.

    This situation isn’t the result of jouralistic practices or slanted reporting, rather it is a symptom of the inability of so many Muslims to engage in even superficial introspection.

    We don’t need foreign policy changes, we need couches and an army of shrinks.

  172. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:32 am  

    Kepler, I don’t understand what you are saying on your last post. Are you seriously saying that the US doesn’t know its mind? That it falls prey to any passing reds-under-the-bed rumour.

    Did it occur to you that, if we are to accept your view on the matter, then US was again duped into invading Iraq. This time by Chalabi.

    You said that the US was duped into allowing Suharto to invade East Timor. I would say Suharto was US’s own man from the beginning.

    As for the brutality – I totally agree, 100%. Brutal to Indonesians and East Timorese. And of course the US was party to it. Another inexcusable act of amorality.

    After the invasion, and after having supported a UN resolution against it, the US continued supplying arms to the dictator without a glance over their shoulder.

    Anyway – on John Pilger, read Hidden Agendas (1998).

  173. Katy Newton — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:33 am  

    You see, if ALL Muslims have the right to feel aggrieved for an attack on even ONE muslim, then ALL muslims are in some sense responsable when even ONE muslim attacks scores of innocents.

    Good God, no. That’s crazy. I mean, that’s ridiculous. Can’t we try and be sensible about this? I am massively affronted by antisemitic attacks and so are the vast majority of Jews, but that doesn’t mean I’d be responsible if one Jew decided that he would get revenge on behalf of all Jews by blowing himself up in an airport.

  174. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:36 am  

    Soso, you are falling into your old habit of deceiving the unwitting of Pickled Politics.

    Do you want to elaborate on this?

    “Bikhair complains of media coverage of Muslims, but has nothing to say about the glaring fact that 95% of religious motivated terrorist attacks (2004-05) were carried out by Muslims.”

    Of all the terrorist attacks – how many out of how many are ‘religiou motivated’?

    Clever, I will give you that.

  175. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:37 am  

    Katy

    That’s an excellent point.

  176. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:40 am  

    Almost as clever as your Byzantine steam engine find, which you weaved into an ‘intelligent’ anti-muslim rant.

  177. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:50 am  

    I don’t think you have to be a Muslim to appreciate why one can’t apologise or take responsibility for a crime one didn’t commit.

    The politics of apology is interesting. Marina Warner, literay don and occassional reith lecturer has written on Opendemocracy on this: http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy-apologypolitics/article_603.jsp

    I find that currently there is more appetite in society for people to ask me to apologise for something I am not responsible for, than say, people reflecting on numerous crimes, even genocidal ones, that states have been responsible for, and abetted, which we don’t seem to think we need an apology for.

    It puts things into perspectives.

  178. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:14 am  

    Random Guy

    “…..And also why the current discourse in the media and parliament is always pointedly implying that all muslims have done something wrong which they should apologise for. That suggestion earns the two fingered salute from me every time.”

    Me too, only I would be a bit more polite.

    However I think there are real changes afoot. The way Brown is handling it, the way Jacqui Smith is responding will most definitely encourage everyone to unite against these terrorists. And against invasions of far off places.

    This just was not possible with Blair and Reid. They had a different agenda. They needed to blame the muslims, and challenge them to come up with the goods (whatever they were).

    Their whole purpose was to create a division between the millions who opposed the war and muslims. As a part of the plan to wreck the anti-war movement, and therefore accept that perhaps Blair had been right all along.

    Brown should use the space to show that we are united against this outrage, and that Blair is history.

  179. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:16 am  

    Well put. I am reading Pickled Politics while at same time as listening to radio and it’s clear that there are real efforts underway by the government to prevent any further escelation of tension which inevitably results when terrorism is committed by an individual from a minoirty population.

    It is a step change from the previous labour administration.

  180. Sarah — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:18 am  

    Refresh and Kepler
    Thanks for an unconstructive and then Kepler’s constructive comment. I stand by brief comment and would be happy to elaborate.

    Refresh -I am not sure what you think is ‘rubbish’ about what I said. I can provide a very detailed account of the history of East Timor (which was never part of Indonesia), the history of the resistance, debates over the numbers killed — and offer comment and suggestions for reading…there is a lot more out there besides Chomsky and Pilger (who both did support the East Timorese in their early days). I know Pilger’s work well – he is part of the Australian liberal/left to whom I refer. His TV documentaries (alongside Peter Gordon and other publicity surrounding the Santa Cruz massacre) were particularly important in grabbing attention here in the UK; this was important backdrop for those who sought to get Britain and Australia to support the peace-keeping mission after the Indonesian army sponsored the militias’ vicious destruction of East Timor after they voted for independence in 1999.
    Yes, the USA, Britain, Australia et al supported in various ways the Indonesian invasion and Australia recognised the annexation in 1975(although neither the USA or UK ever did). Clinton, Blair and Howard(in the face of massive demonsrations) were eventually critical in getting ‘independence’ recognised by the Indonesians.
    So Refresh? The Indonesian military did not kill all these people ???– it was not their soldiers on the ground at Dili harbour executing people, or at Balibo killing the Australian and British journalists or the thousands of East Timorese in the extensive ‘fence of legs’ campaigns in 1975-1978, etc. etc. etc. Who was it then???

    Or have I missed the war crimes trials? I do know that Gusmao – in particular- has been utterly committed to reconciliation and thus never sought war crimes trials; others who are more pragmatic always said that East Timor could never ‘afford’ to press for such trials– but many hoped that the ‘international community’ would do so.

    Or do you think that I glossed over the conflict between Gusmao and Alkatiri, and between factions in the army which resulted in violence this year? Yeah, this was a short interjection.

    Or do you want citations to substantiate my reference to their ‘rejection of terrorism’ statement?

    If you doubt the Bin Laden references, just google to get his statements on both events.

    I know East Timor’s history well, who supported the campaigns around the world (eg TAPOL for one), know many East Timorese (and Indonesians) and have been there-albeit for a brief period , including doing interviews.

    Kepler– thanks for highlighting the wikipedia article; I will try to get some specialists to amend some particular sections of it. Yes the number around which there is most agreement is about 200,000 which would have been a quarter or more of the population. I have yet to meet an East Timorese who did not lose relatives, friends, or neighbours.
    I realise that a fuller discussion about whether this was ‘techinically’ genocide is required. I would point out that people were relocated to ‘strategic hamlets’; they could use neither Tetum nor Portuguese ‘officially’ or in schools–part of the reasons for growth of the Church as a space for cultural resistance.

    Sorry for scatter gun answer…must seem esoteric to those unfamiliar with East Timor. I sorrow for its past and worry for its future. I think there is much to learn from its brief history.
    I would love to have a long discussion about East Timor but there is little opportunity!!

    If you only read one account of the history, read John Taylor The Price of Freedom published in 1999 (earlier version Indonesia’s Forgotten War)which gives a history upto the 1999 referendum and its immediate aftermath; read John Matinkus Indonesia’s Dirty War for a history of the referendum period.
    Thanks Kepler.

  181. Sunny — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:21 am  

    y the government to prevent any further escelation of tension which inevitably results when terrorism is committed by an individual from a minoirty population.

    I agree with that. Both the new Home Office minister and Brown have been restrained.

  182. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:33 am  

    “So Refresh? The Indonesian military did not kill all these people ???– it was not their soldiers on the ground at Dili harbour executing people, or at Balibo killing the Australian and British journalists or the thousands of East Timorese in the extensive ‘fence of legs’ campaigns in 1975-1978, etc. etc. etc. Who was it then???”

    This is the problem. Did you not see my last post? I have long been anti-Suharto and pro-East Timor.

    You accuse the left of having no interest, but going by what I picked up from your own post and Kepler’s – it was the right-wing policies that gave us the tragedy of East Timor.

    What was your purpose in posting here? I am now bewildered.

  183. douglas clark — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:39 am  

    Tahir,

    The politics of apology might be difficult. The politics of declaring a clear blue ocean between yourself and the maniacs, less so.

    I am going out on a limb here, but Muslims are not making that distinction. They should, big time.

    A reasonable analogy is folk that support a football team with a ‘casual’ element to their support. Until such times as the majority of the fans reject the casuals, they are all tarred with the same brush. Sad, but true.

    Just as a by the way, my kids were flying out of Ibitha (sp?)to Glasgow on the day in question. No, they didn’t win the lottery either.

  184. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:44 am  

    That’s the difference between us I think – I *do* think Suharto, Pinochet, Pineapple-face in Panama (whose name I can’t remember now), etc were their own men, quite adept at manipulating the U.S. into supporting and supplying them, behind the scenes. Certainly, in Chile, Nicaragua, Panama, there were what I thought at the time, and still do, were popular left-wing movements, (elected in Chile and Nicaragua at least – I can’t remember if in Panama also) which could easily be portrayed as more communist than they were, by their opponents to gain support from the U.S.

    So, not just “any passing reds-under-the-bed rumour”, again, from memory, Allende wasn’t much more left-wing than Labour was then, whereas the Sandanistas were communist.

    And I don’t think the U.S. was duped into invading Iraq by Chalabi – I think they’d have invaded anyway. I do think they were misled by him about the prognosis for events afterwards.

    Whereas, I do think they could be conned into supporting Suharto’s invasion of a very small ex-colony – I can imagine them thinking “maybe there’s a communist threat – it’s very small, probably not a viable state, who else is there ?”

  185. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:48 am  

    Anyway, here’s a moral dilemma for some of you:

    From the BBC:
    Anger at Prince free CD giveaway

    “The music industry has reacted angrily at a decision to give away the new album by US musician Prince with a tabloid newspaper.

    Planet Earth will be given free with a future edition of the Mail on Sunday”

  186. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:52 am  

    Kepler, I can’t see it the way you do. Putting aside the invasion of East Timor (with Australian involvement).

    Suharto killed hundreds of thousands of Indonesians, in a very similar way to Saddam Hussein. And oddly enough these too were seen to be lefties.

    I remain bewildered about the reason for posting about East Timor on this thread and your take on it.

    Its also odd you see it acceptable to facilitate invasions and mass killings on the basis of ‘paranoia’.

    I am waiting for clarification from Sarah. And looking back it all seems a bizarre contribution to this thread.

  187. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:04 am  

    Refresh,

    do you even bother to read what I post. In no sense do I think it “acceptable to facilitate invasions and mass killings on the basis of ‘paranoia” – I was outraged about Chile, Nicaragua, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc then, and still am – to repeat what I said above, which you apparently couldn’t understand

    “Vietnam, Cambodia, Nicaragua, etc, were inexcusable acts of amorality”

    Is that clear enough for you ?

    In the particular case of East Timor, though, I do hold Suharto primarily responsible for the invasion and brutal colonisation – I don’t think the U.S. would have cared one way or the other without Suharto.

    Just as the U.S., back then, used to see everything in very simple black-and-white terms, so do you, except that you regard the U.S. as uniquely evil, where they regarded communism the same way.

  188. bikhair aka taqiyyah — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:04 am  

    Soso,

    “Bikhair complains of media coverage of Muslims, but has nothing to say about the glaring fact that 95% of religious motivated terrorist attacks (2004-05) were carried out by Muslims.”

    I did no such thing. You must be confusing me with all the other millions of Muslims you wanted to have this debate with. Didnt I tell you to grow a brain? How is that progressing?

  189. douglas clark — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:08 am  

    Kepler,

    You said:

    “I do think they were misled by him about the prognosis for events afterwards.”

    Are you saying that the whole US government was so naive that they all bought the Brooklyn Bridge off Chalabi, in the sense of the ease of victory and what it would mean?

    Bloody hell. It’s worse than I thought.

  190. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:12 am  

    Douglas, that’s a good analogy, thanks.

  191. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:12 am  

    “In the particular case of East Timor, though, I do hold Suharto primarily responsible for the invasion and brutal colonisation – I don’t think the U.S. would have cared one way or the other without Suharto.

    Just as the U.S., back then, used to see everything in very simple black-and-white terms, so do you, except that you regard the U.S. as uniquely evil, where they regarded communism the same way.”

    Kepler, but I did read it. And with some care.

    Only in this last post do you actually start to clarify. If you hold Suharto primarily responsible, then you should go read a little more about Kissinger and ‘Realpolitik’.

  192. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:17 am  

    Douglas – I meant the football supporters analogy.

    As for buying the Brooklyn Bridge; either they seriously miscalculated the aftermath of an easy victory, based on, amongst other sources, input from Chalabi, or they didn’t – you choose …

  193. kepler — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:32 am  

    Refresh,

    I don’t need to “read about Kissinger” – I bloody lived through all of this, Kissinger, real-politik, and all.

    I’ve been clear in everything I’ve written – how could I be any clearer than post #169 – and how could you misinterpret anything I’ve said there or anywhere else, as arguing that it’s “acceptable to facilitate invasions and mass killings on the basis of ‘paranoia’”

    I really don’t think there’s any further point in discussing this with you – just re-read what I wrote in #169

  194. douglas clark — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:32 am  

    Point taken, thanks for you comment.

    I have always, kind of, subscribed to the perhaps ridiculous notion that G W Bush felt that the unfinished business of Iraq 1 was a slur on the family name. That his dad stopping short of taking Saddam out, and then getting nothing much other than shit back, was enough to ‘justify’ it. In the minds of the Texas oil cabal, at least…. Or anyone who has watched the Godfather…

    So, my question is, was Chalabi a catalyst or a dupe? Y’know, the person Bush wanted to big up? Or did he big himself up? Or does the truth lie elsewhere?

    This is a genuine question. I really do not know the answer.

  195. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 7:57 am  

    Douglas 193

    Sorry to hear yoour kids were travelling through Glasgow. I can vaguely sympathise – my mates were also leaving Ibitza on the day in question.

    I think your analogy on the football hooliganism, if I’ve understood it correctly, is interesting.

    It’s not right to tar football supporters of a team with the hooliganism of a minority. But it happens.

    The difference, though, is that fans choose which team they support – it is not an fundamental part of their identity in they way religion or ethnicity might be. Blaming individuals for acts committed others on grounds that all share the same ‘identity’ is nothing more than prejudice – the football analogy isn’t appropriate.

    I don’t have to listen to daily news articles, bus conversations, blog discussions on football hooliganism but I do have to listen to why Muslim’s aren’t apologising for terrorism.

    It’s strange the implications of your agument might be that individual identity and rights have less value compared with collective rights and responsibilities.

    I always refer back to the practice of rape as a crime by male perpertrators. Just because the majority of rapists are male do we assume all men are rapists until proven otherwise.

  196. ChrisC — on 2nd July, 2007 at 9:10 am  

    “I mean what should I do? Buy a T-shirt with a logo saying MUSLIM: YES, TERRORIST: NO, FURTHER QUESTIONS PLEASE ASK?”

    I bet you could make some money from that idea!

  197. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 9:54 am  

    Kepler, I am sorry if I seem to have misunderstood you.

    But I don’t know if I have.

    Why would Sarah want to introduce the topic here in this thread, suggesting the left was at fault? When all along you and I know that it was US policy.

    Or could it be that she feels an injection of plausible facts would move our debate on? And if she is going round posting it on several threads. Perhaps she or you could tell me which ones, so I can understand her motives.

    No I didn’t want a debate on it either.

  198. soru — on 2nd July, 2007 at 11:32 am  

    I remain bewildered about the reason for posting about East Timor on this thread and your take on it.

    My understanding is this: there were two major relevent events in East Timorese history:

    1. the 1975 invasion by Suharto. Lots of deaths, islamic-majority country becomes bigger.

    2. the 1999 UN-backed australia-led intervention, which led to independence and elections. Few deaths, majority-christian country becomes independent.

    The US supported both, under different administrations and for different reasons.

    The UN and mainstream liberals and leftists, from Blair to Pilger, opposed the first and supported the second.

    Osama bin laden is not on record on the first as far as I know, but strongly opposed the second, citing it as a justification for the Bali bombings.

    So citing East Timor as a point of agreement between leftists and OBL is a sign of either ignorance or deception. If an Islamist drops away for a moment from the generality of claiming ‘foreign policy’ as their greivance to say ‘East Timor’, it is really important to realise that to the extent they mean anything, they mean they wanted more Kissinger and less Pilger.

  199. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:14 pm  

    Soru,

    the issue goes further back. To the point where Suharto was elevated through Kissinger to dictator status, and the extreme repression of his own people resulting in more deaths than even East Timor. I seem to recall numbers close to 800,000 others say close to 2 million. Leftists mainly.

    And of course it also exposes the hypocrisy of Anglo-American foreign policy. I say Anglo-American, because it is wrong to allow the US to wrap itself in the broader concept of the ‘West’.

  200. soru — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:50 pm  

    ‘hypocrisy’ is a very useful word, as it allows you to hate someone when they something, and then hate them even more when they do the opposite.

    Very useful, if hate is your goal.

  201. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 12:54 pm  

    Really? That looks like you finessing.

  202. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:03 pm  

    http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB62/

    It’s diffuclt to track recent US history because we’re not able to look at recent national securituy archives – in the US the study of recent history is difficult to do because they don’t have access to up to date archives in the way the UK does (barring D note classifications) .

    Still the above links uncovers some of the recent archives relating to Indonesia and state involvement. It’s from the not-for-profit research org in George Town University.

    10 years ago I attended a course on Kissinger’s foreign policy in the UK and there were some US students taking part – and they were horrified that in the UK it was possible to study such recent events as a ‘history’ unit. That woulda been in 1995. So 20 years later they were unable to contend with in involvement either in the US war in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos or in the Chinese War in Vietman after US withdrawal.

    I imagine now with a US administration mind set ever bent on proving Islamic involvement, the quagmire is even more muddier.

  203. soru — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:04 pm  

    If you want to avoid finessing, can you say straight out that you think australia/UK/US/UN did a reasonable approximation of the right thing in 1999?

    The US is not an individual, it is a political system that at different times has different policies. It can no more be hypocritical than it sing, dance or make babies. A lot of people seem to forget that, have an emotional relationship to ‘Uncle Sam’ that is indistinguishable from that with a real person.

    Now, if you can point to some particular US politician or official who supports both 1975 and 1999 simulataneously, then hypocrisy is likely a valid popint about that individual. I doubt the best exampel you could find of such a person would be very high up in power – Kissinger, for example, was thoroughly against 1999, for much the same reasons he opposed the Iraq war.

  204. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:07 pm  

    The link reads, among other things:

    Two newly declassified documents from the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library, released to the National Security Archive, shed light on the Ford administration’s relationship with President Suharto of Indonesia during 1975. Of special importance is the record of Ford’s and Kissinger’s meeting with Suharto in early December 1975. The document shows that Suharto began the invasion knowing that he had the full approval of the White House. Both of these documents had been released in heavily excised form some years ago, but with Suharto now out of power, and following the collapse of Indonesian control over East Timor, the situation has changed enough that both documents have been released in their entirety.

    Other documents found among State Department records at the National Archives elucidate the inner workings of U.S. policy toward the Indonesian crisis during 1975 and 1976. Besides confirming that Henry Kissinger and top advisers expected an eventual Indonesian takeover of East Timor, archival material shows that the Secretary of State fully understood that the invasion of East Timor involved the “illegal” use of U.S.-supplied military equipment because it was not used in self-defense as required by law.

    Although Indonesia was a major site of U.S. energy and raw materials investment, an important petroleum exporter, strategically located near vital shipping lanes, and a significant recipient of U.S. military assistance, the country—much less the East Timor question—barely figures into Henry Kissinger’s memoirs of the Nixon and Ford administrations. Gerald Ford’s memoir briefly discusses the December 1975 visit to Jakarta but does not mention the discussion of East Timor with Suharto. Indeed, as important as the bilateral relationship was, Jakarta’s brutal suppression of the independence movement in East Timor was a development that neither Ford nor Kissinger wanted people to remember about their time in power. That the two decided on a course of action of dubious legality and that resulted in the slaughter of thousands of Timorese may well have also discouraged further reflection, at least in public. No doubt the omissions from Ford’s and Kissinger’s memoirs also reflect the low priority that East Timor had during the Ford administration. For senior officials, the fate of a post-colonial East Timor paled in comparison to the strategic relationship with the anti-communist Suharto regime, especially in the wake of the communist victory in Vietnam, when Ford and Kissinger wanted to strengthen relations with anti-communists and check left-wing movements in the region.(1) But it is not simply a matter of omission; on several occasions Kissinger has explicitly denied that he ever had substantive discussions of East Timor with Suharto, much less having consented to Indonesian plans.(2) The new evidence contradicts Kissinger’s statements: Indonesian plans for the invasion of East Timor were indeed discussed with Suharto, and Ford and Kissinger gave them the green light. As Kissinger advised Suharto on the eve of the invasion: “it is important that whatever you do succeeds quickly” but that “it would be better if it were done after we returned” to the United States.

    Although these new documents shed important light on U.S. policy toward the East Timor question in 1975, much more needs to be learned about U.S. policymaking during 1975 and 1976. Unfortunately, most of the relevant sources are classified. The large collection of Kissinger-Scowcroft office files at the Ford Library remains unavailable, as are the records of the State Department’s Indonesia desk and the Bureau of East Asian Affairs for the 1970s. The State Department’s recent acquisition of Henry Kissinger’s telephone conversation transcripts might include important material, although they will probably reflect the relatively low priority that the policymakers gave to the East Timor question.

  205. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:20 pm  

    Soru, as far as 1999 is concerned there were two points I picked up on.

    1. It was a good thing that the East Timorese finally got what they wanted.

    2. US/UK/Aus do their own thing, because they can. Why we do not yet know.

  206. Refresh — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:22 pm  

    Correction:

    2. US/UK/Aus do their own thing, because they can. Why they did in this case we do not yet know. However I’d like to think that Clinton, Blair et al did it for the right reasons.

  207. Uncleji says lunch is a deadly business — on 2nd July, 2007 at 1:38 pm  

    Now probally isn’t the best time to market my line of desi style tiffins.
    As I found on friday its not a good idea for a rotound bearded asian looking chap to carry a metallic container during bomb alerts. Though mine one did have KRISHA in big letters across it.
    Its time to hijack nephewji’s bob the builder lunchbox.

    http://www.2tastyladies.com/pics/tiffin.JPG

  208. Uncleji is Dusty from the Archives — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:19 pm  

    “in the US the study of recent history is difficult to do because they don’t have access to up to date archives in the way the UK does (barring D note classifications)”
    I might be a simple Punjabi Slumlord but even I know about the 30 year rule which applied to ALL official documents until the Foi Act. Even then some were further restricted to 50 or 100 years. A big chunk continue to retained for NO reason by government departments. The D notice to do with the punishing of media articles not the release of documents.

    “The FOI access regime replaces that of the Public Records Act, which was commonly referred to as the 30 year rule. Under this Act, records were opened on 1st January, 30 years after the date of the last paper or entry in a record, plus one extra year, to ensure that all papers on the file were at least 30 years old. Thus records bearing a last date of 1973 were released into the public domain on 1 January 2004. This process was known as the New Year’s Openings.”

  209. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:21 pm  

    This is true of the UK but different access regimes apply to the US.

  210. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:23 pm  

    As far back as 2001 relevant docs in the US national security archives relating to East Timor remain in accessible.

    I haven’t checked 2007. Mainly because I’m not studying this but discussing as a casual topic.

  211. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:23 pm  

    correction. Inaccessible.

  212. Tahir — on 2nd July, 2007 at 2:28 pm  

    Council of Foreign Relations – imminent think tank on foreign affairs in the UK – not left wing bu any standards, but highly influential, praised Goerge Town university for accessing imp docs from 1950-1970s very recently:

    National Security Archive’s “Family Jewels” CIA-Related Documents, January 1975

    Published June 21, 2007

    Prior to the CIA’s release of a 693-page file on the agency’s illegal activities from the 1950s – 1970s, known as the “family jewels”, the National Security Archive at George Washington University obtained and posted several documents from 1975 pertaining to the CIA documents. They describe the government’s internal discussions of the CIA’s abuses involving domestic spying, infiltration of left-leaning groups, assassination plots, and kidnapping.

    Essential Documents are vital primary sources underpinning the foreign policy debate.

  213. sakthi — on 2nd July, 2007 at 4:47 pm  

    Its really condemn act,whomever did this and for whatever cause.Surely this is not a way to express one’s belief.If you want to say or convey your beliefs/thoughts to the world just do something positive and express your view,people would love to hear you..But act like this,even though your belief is right,you can’t get any solution because the way you chosen is wrong…
    mobile phone deals

  214. El Cid — on 2nd July, 2007 at 10:08 pm  

    bikhair
    i didn’t say i necessarily agreed with the article.
    it wasn’t posted to ‘prove’ a point made previously.
    I just came across it by chance and thought it would interest picklers.

    generally my point was that there is something stale and predictable about the quality of ‘debate’ around certain subjects, which can be a little frustrating.

  215. Soso — on 2nd July, 2007 at 10:32 pm  

    Please prove beyound a reasonable doubt that the above are true. Dont just assume that I will agree with you.

    Mohammed murdered thousands. All of this is well documented by observers of the time and even by Arabo-Muslim pundits.

    Reasonable proof if ever there was, and it didn’t even require the testamony of four women!

    Once again why complain about media coverage of Muslims when al that is done is to dispassionately report events.

    Good God, no. That’s crazy. I mean, that’s ridiculous. Can’t we try and be sensible about this? I am massively affronted by antisemitic attacks and so are the vast majority of Jews, but that doesn’t mean I’d be responsible if one Jew decided that he would get revenge on behalf of all Jews by blowing himself up in an airport

    But Judaism isn’t Islam, Katy.

    Jihadists constantly invoke the one-for-all, all-for-one maxim. It’s been a part of Islam since the very beginning.

    Bikhair will seethe with anger if someone harms a single Muslim…seeing it as her religious duty, but she’s mum when Muslims committ mass murder…taking no responsability for their actions.

    Her anger, then, is reserved NOT for immoral actions, but for events that set back the cause.

    In short, she’s the very template for bald-faced hypocrisy.

  216. Clairwil — on 2nd July, 2007 at 11:32 pm  

    A bit of light relief at last….

    http://johnsmeaton.com/

  217. Sunny — on 3rd July, 2007 at 1:03 am  

    But Judaism isn’t Islam, Katy.

    Jihadists constantly invoke the one-for-all, all-for-one maxim. It’s been a part of Islam since the very beginning.

    Yes Soso, clearly Muslims are the only lot who care about co-religionists. It’s as if Israel V Lebanon never happened. It’s as if the Pope doesn’t exist.

    Really, if you want to convince others of your arguments, at least invoke the grey matter sometime. You’re wasting my bandwidth.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.