The chickens come home to roost

Lucky for that “War on Ter­ror” thing ay? Ter­ror­ist incid­ents have increased year on year since Bush took power in 2001. Before that they were decreas­ing year on year. My mother man­aged to phone me today from New Zea­l­and, to check I hadn’t been blown up. She advised that I take care with my words.

The first hint I received of some­thing amiss in Lon­don this morn­ing was full bus loads of people drift­ing end­lessly past my bus stop, and a long walk to work. This after­noon there has been tens of thou­sands of people walk­ing the streets of Lon­don in the absence of pub­lic trans­port. On the BBC there has been incess­ant report­ing that people “can’t believe this has happened.” Yeah right, it’s no damn sur­prise and Lon­don­ers know it. Today’s just extra spe­cial because the bombs were poin­ted the other way, just like Septem­ber 11.

Hav­ing elec­ted as Prime Min­is­ter a man who is argu­ably a war crim­inal I must say I find it dif­fi­cult to muster up the kind of sym­pathy that would usu­ally befit a nation in times like these, just as I found it dif­fi­cult to muster up sym­pathy for the U.S. as a nation on Septem­ber 11. Then as now the over­whelm­ing feel­ing is one of grim pre­dict­ab­il­ity. I have dulled empty feel­ings for those in the middle of it all, just as I do for hun­dreds of thou­sands — in fact mil­lions — of Iraqis, Palestini­ans, and end­less other peoples killed by the gangs we call our gov­ern­ments. It’s just a little dif­fi­cult to get emo­tional about every killing when they hap­pen in the num­bers they do. Am I meant to be more emo­tional today because they’re Westerners?

After return­ing to Lon­don from Iraq in March 2003 I often found myself down at the local pub in dis­cus­sions with people who were, one, con­fid­ent they lived in a demo­cracy, and two, indif­fer­ent about the inva­sion of Iraq. I’ve always found it a little dif­fi­cult to deal with such indif­fer­ence. “At the end of the day,” I used to say to them, “you can enjoy your pint of beer in the sun and ignore the mur­der­ous actions of your so-called demo­cratic gov­ern­ment in faraway lands, but don’t go com­plain­ing when someone comes look­ing for some justice in the form of a bomb under your ass.”

And from what I’ve gleaned today they’re not. Many Brits seem to know the score.

Whether this was the act of MI6/MI5 oper­at­ives or the so-called “Al-Qaeda,” Blair has blood on his hands. And while we’re going to be hear­ing a lot about “us” and “them,” there’s little doubt in my mind that the con­nec­tion between the death of “their” babies and the death of “ours” will never be made in the com­ing media storm. Instead it will be Blair to the res­cue!! Bring on 1984!!

Accord­ing to Wiki­pe­dia, a per­son using the name “Nur al-Iman,” pos­ted to the jihadist web­site Al-Qal’ah (Fort­ress), a state­ment issued by “The Secret Organ­isa­tion Group of Al-Qa’ida of Jihad Organ­iz­a­tion in Europe.” In the state­ment, the group claims respons­ib­il­ity for the Lon­don attack. The fol­low­ing is a trans­lated text of the state­ment (minus all the god stuff):

Nation of Islam and Arab nation: Rejoice for it is time to take revenge against the Brit­ish Zion­ist cru­sader gov­ern­ment in retali­ation for the mas­sacres Bri­tain is com­mit­ting in Iraq and Afgh­anistan. The heroic mujahideen have car­ried out a blessed raid in Lon­don. Bri­tain is now burn­ing with fear, ter­ror and panic in its north­ern, south­ern, east­ern, and west­ern quarters.

We have repeatedly warned the Brit­ish gov­ern­ment and people. We have ful­filled our prom­ise and car­ried out our blessed mil­it­ary raid in Bri­tain after our mujahideen exer­ted strenu­ous efforts over a long period of time to ensure the suc­cess of the raid.

We con­tinue to warn the gov­ern­ments of Den­mark and Italy and all the cru­sader gov­ern­ments that they will be pun­ished in the same way if they do not with­draw their troops from Iraq and Afgh­anistan. He who warns is excused.

Mike Mar­qusee writes for Coun­ter­punch:

Blair has already appeared on tele­vi­sion to address the nation … Even by Blair’s stand­ards, it was a per­form­ance of naus­eat­ing hypo­crisy, as he sought to seize the moral high ground in rela­tion to viol­ence and destruc­tion that he him­self helped unleash.

Foment­ing and exploit­ing fear has been a spe­ci­al­ity of the Blair regime. Asylum seekers, teen­agers wear­ing hoods, mil­it­ant Muslims, anarch­ists, pae­do­philes the list of tar­gets is lengthy and fright­en­ingly flex­ible. Whenever there is a need to dis­tract people from the impact of the government’s neo-liberal eco­nomic policies, from its fail­ure to rebuild the pub­lic sec­tor, from its mis­be­got­ten for­eign adven­tures, a new scape­goat is con­jured up. The bomb blasts may aid this pro­cess, but there is also reason to hope that this time there will be sub­stan­tial pub­lic resistance.

I hope so Mike, I hope so.

Comments

4 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.
  1. Bruce Puriri,

    He who warns is excused.”

    That is an import­ant quote in this context.

    I con­sider there is an eth­ical base in that code.

    If I was of a mind to take up arms, and if I was a young Arab there would be reas­ons for me to be of that mind.
    If my people, my cul­ture, the people dear to me, those I loved, were exper­i­en­cing the abuse that many Arab com­munit­ies are exper­i­en­cing , I would con­sider fair warn­ing had been given.

    The bombs and rock­ets used against Arab homes and com­munit­ies are no more dis­crim­in­at­ing, per­haps less so, than these bombers.

    Like any per­son liv­ing a happy life, I want peace and oppose the prac­tice of war­fare. A per­son with the sun­shine and ful­fil­ment in my life of a typ­ical Kiwi pen­sioner, does not have the grounds to urge violence.

    But once again, the muja­hadeen have won my uncom­fort­able and reluct­ant respect, and they are entitled to a fair hear­ing for their claims of injustice.

    We can­not forever refuse to talk with these people.

  2. I hear ya Bruce, but I’m not sure there’s all that much to talk about. And it’s not even a mat­ter of “appeas­ing ter­ror­ists” either, which, as you know, is what some people call efforts to get to the root cause of these prob­lems. No, “appease­ment” assumes that our gov­ern­ments actu­ally con­duct them­selves in a reas­on­able man­ner in the first place. Of course they clearly don’t, and we as West­ern cit­izens have not man­aged to stop them.

    In 1996, Madeleine Albright, then the U.S. sec­ret­ary of state, was asked on national tele­vi­sion what she felt about the fact that 500,000 Iraqi chil­dren had died as a res­ult of US-led eco­nomic sanc­tions. She replied that it was ‘a very hard choice,’ but that, all things con­sidered, ‘we think the price is worth it.’ These are not the words of a reas­on­able person.

    It’s not reas­on­able to invade other coun­tries and mur­der­ously bomb them in aggres­sion. It’s not reas­on­able to sup­port Israeli apartheid oppres­sion and tyranny, it’s not reas­on­able to sell weapons to viol­ent dic­tat­ors through­out the world, it’s not reas­on­able to believe that we have more rights to oil than the rest of the world.

    These aren’t pet issues of some pinko com­mie act­iv­ist. These are the said reas­ons for the Septem­ber 11 attacks. Any­one with an inter­net con­nec­tion is free to go and read it for them­selves, and I implore them to. http://english.aljazeera.net/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html

  3. ps,

    Al-Qaeda Is Fic­tion: The Organ­iz­a­tion Doesn’t Exist

    hi chris­ti­aan, down­load and watch the 3 part bbc doc­u­ment­ary -
    worth watch­ing imo.
    cheers.

    Mark Perkel | July 4 2005

    three films pro­duced by the BBC called “The Power of Night­mares” which explain how vari­ous groups use the fear of ter­ror­ism to advance their polit­ical power

    they are an hour long each and are about 75 megs each. They are how­ever extraordin­ary and it’s quite an edu­ca­tion into the his­tory of Islamic Ter­ror­ism and Amer­ican neo con­ser­vat­ives. Here are the links:

    prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/040705doesntexist.htm

  4. Thanks for the link, I have seen this very good doc­u­ment­ary. I agree that “Al-Qaeda” is a very polit­ic­ally motiv­ated term (it helps bin Laden and Bush) but there was and is an alli­ance of mil­it­ants ori­gin­at­ing from the Saudi-funded Arab fight­ers who flocked to join the mujahideen res­ist­ance move­ment against the Soviet occu­pa­tion of Afghanistan.

    Accord­ing to this CNN inter­view with Osama bin Laden in Octo­ber 2001, this is what he had to say about it:

    The name “al Qaeda” was estab­lished a long time ago by mere chance. The late Abu Ebeida El-Banashiri estab­lished the train­ing camps for our muja­hedeen against Russia’s ter­ror­ism. We used to call the train­ing camp al Qaeda [mean­ing “the base” in Eng­lish]. And the name stayed.

    So, unless we’re all being hood­winked, and Osama bin Laden and Bush are in cahoots (which I admit is a very real pos­sib­il­ity), “Al-Qaeda” does stand for some­thing reas­on­ably tan­gible. I use the term “so-called Al-Qaeda” simply because it’s a polit­ic­ally charged term first intro­duced to us by the U.S. government.

Add Your Comments

Disclaimer
Your email is never published nor shared.
Required
Required
Tips

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Ready?

  • Recent comments