London Targeted: Numbers Game

Re: # 32 DM
//... But where do the people who blew up the trains in Madrid or Tube in London get their mandate?....//

65% pakis support Osama and Al qaeda, probably that many saudis support him too. Is that ``mandate`` good for you?

Come on, who are you kidding? These people are doing what they are doing because of the widespread support they enjoy from muslims world over. This is a war - this is war between west and islam/muslims.

Who do you bomb now? ... what about the GHQ in pakiland? Prince Bandar`s palace in Saudi? That will do. It ain`t that difficult really.

This is a call to ALL muslims to take a stand because the terrorists have made it so. They have usurped the religion and are killing in our name. I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t recall getting an email from OBL asking my permission to blow up buildings, subways, and buses. And then categorically declaring that it is incumbent on all muslims everywhere to kill “infidels”. The west hasn’t equated all muslims with terrorism, the terrorists have managed to do that all on their own.

The blood hasn’t even dried on the streets of London and the muslim leadership instead of considering themselves true members of the community and helping, are worried about their OWN necks! Honestly, bohoth sharm ki baat hai!

[...They should have negotiated with the Taliban to get the elusive OBL. And then concentrated on rebuilding Afghanistan...]

coming from a guy who was ecstatic about flying pakistani fighter jets alongwith the americans against the taliban in afghanistan...romair manages to give people something to laugh about even in tragic times.

they aren`t just killing the egyptian envoy. they have killed the egyptian envoy.

Ihab al-Sherif is dead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4660909.stm

bastards!

what was that about the wilderness again?

may god give strength to his family at this time. and may he rest in peace.

and no one`s circular arguments or rationalizing is going to bring him back. or any of the dead for that matter.

#25 by Romair on July 8, 2005 10:30am PT


Whom is the UK going to attack now?


Cracking down on the brit-paki-Islamist nuts would be a good start...you know the type...ahmed omar saeed sheikh....

Apparently, I am not the only one who holds such views. The mayor of London, himself, has the same views:

``One of the arguments deployed by Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, when he appealed to Tony Blair not to support the war in Iraq was prescient: ``An assault on Iraq will inflame world opinion and jeopardise security and peace everywhere. London, as one of the major world cities, has a great deal to lose from war and a lot to gain from peace, international cooperation and global stability.``

Basically, he is telling Blair that if he attack Iraq, sooner or later, someone will attack London..........

This circle of violence is reaching dangerous proportions. Many of us, had been stating this for a long time, when we wrote against the Iraq war. The blame for these attacks, primarily, goes onto the individuals who carried them out. And secondarily goes onto the individuals who have been pushing the war in Iraq............

Obviously, all these attacks are a part of political violence. They are not some random targeting by people trying to overthrow the UK govt. There have been attacks in Pakistan against American targets (which killed Pakistanis, and no Americans). There was a massive attack in Indonesia, against Australians. There was an attack in Spain against Spaniards. There was an attack in Turkey against a British target. And now an attack in London against Londoners.

Even a child should be able to put two and two together to see what is common. There is a common political strategy. If they cannot put two and two together, then they need to simply go to the website of the group that claimed the attack. England, Australia, Spain and USA all have (had) forces in Iraq. That is obviously the common thread..........Canada, Germany, France, Switzerland, Luxemborg, etc. have not been targeted. Since they have no troops in Iraq........

So the Iraq war is now slowly moving from the streets of Baghdad to the streets of Europe. Instead of trying to play a game of one-upsmanship, people should be concentrating on trying to solve the violence. Rhetoric obviously won`t do much.

Whom is the UK going to attack now? Where exactly does Al-Qaeda exist? It is not a country. It is not a city. At best, it could start targeting its own citizens. Which is probably exactly what Al-Qaeda wants UK to do. As for members of Al-Qaeda is, they, themselves are willing to die. So how exactly does one kill someone, who himself is ready to die.

The solution lies in assessing how much one is willing to give up, in order to carry out violence. Al-Qaeda is willing to give up everything. As are probably many of the citizens of Iraq - specifically those who have lost a lot in this war. If today, Pakistan went and occupied Sri Lanka and killed 100,000 people, sooner or later, the Tamil Tigers would start blowing up people in Karachi or Lahore, instead of in Colombo and Kandy. It is inevitable. At that point, Pakistanis would have to assess whether it is worth their while to continue in such a situation........

This circle of violence is going to get larger and larger, and more and more people will get involved. The end of this circle of violence, lies, not in raising the war rhetoric, but in exiting from it........

So all the people who have loudly been waving the war flags, from any direction, should take some responsibility for the deaths in London, also...............The longer this war goes on, the larger this circle of violence will probably get. Eventually reaching a point where everyone will be engulfed. That is what happened with the Palestine-Israel issue, also............

Iraq seems to have now turned into the new Afghanistan........Which is quite unfortunate..........And I am convinced that whatever has been done there, will have a lot of blowback..........Some of which we have already seen..........People can create rhetoric and increase the problem, or people can think sanely and try to reduce it.........

It makes no sense in getting into a pissing contest with someone who is willing to die for his cause (however, right or wrong the cause maybe)............One should only do that if one has nothing to lose..........Al-Qaeda has nothing to lose........UK has a lot to lose.......UK would be wise to fight Al-Qaeda inside the UK (if it exists)........It is being exceptionally naive in creating more Al-Qaeda by attacking Iraq........

The only country, out of the above list, that has a legitimate battle against Al-Qaeda, is Pakistan. Since Al-Qaeda has infiltrated inside Pakistan. All other countries are creating unnecessary problems for themselves by attacking other countries. They should have negotiated with the Taliban to get the elusive OBL. And then concentrated on rebuilding Afghanistan................That would have made the whole world a safer place........

Re: # 25
Dear Romair:

You have made several points in your post, and I would like to address the following:

1. ``This circle of violence is reaching dangerous proportions..... ..... Obviously, all these attacks are a part of political violence. ..... And now an attack in London against Londoners.``

2. ``Even a child should be able to put two and two together to see what is common. There is a common political strategy. .... England, Australia, Spain and USA all have (had) forces in Iraq. That is obviously the common thread..........Canada, Germany, France, Switzerland, Luxemborg, etc. have not been targeted. Since they have no troops in Iraq........ ``


You are oversimplifying a very complex situation. ``This circle of violence`` and child should be able to ``put two and two together`` to state violence began with Iraq war is a wrong perspective. The truth is when the violence matures to a stage that it begins the ``circle of violence`` no one involved in it can see the beginning and end of the circle - the two merged long time ago to make a circle. Therefore at this stage it cannot be left for child logic of ``put two and two together``. The two only way the circle of violence is thrown out when both parties decide to go for it - either through violent means or through peacefule means.

3. ``So the Iraq war is now slowly moving from the streets of Baghdad to the streets of Europe. ....``

Thus moving the violence of war to streets of Europe is only escalating it further ``upping the ante``. Honestly you do not think that the west does not have warewithall to up the ante still further. You can see the result of what happened to Soviet Union when the ante was being upped in the game of circle of violence through cold war. One is thing is for certain the ante has been upped now ... Al Qaida decided to do it by moving the was to Streets of London. This action fills the west with more terrible resolve to fight on and not back down. The solidarity in the line up shown behind Blair on TV must be clear to every admirer of such logic that if the west can annouce $50 Billion debt write off it can take care of cost of war. Believe it or not this cost will be paid out of Arab oil eventually, and rich Arabs will take the hits, and poor Arabs will stay deeper in grinding probably perpetual poverty. Would you not call it Ironic that in that G8 there were two addtions - Chinese and Indian faces - and no Arab, no Pakistani, no Iranian, no Turkish faces -- simply put no muslim / Islamic faces. Now you can interpret it as the grand strategy against Islam, or accept it as a solidarity against the violence. The choice is your, the consequences will be faced mutually.

The rest of the humanity is trying to trying to say ``own the violence and fight`` or ``disown the violence of OBL / Al Qaida and join``.

Yesterday, the terror was the 11th uninvited member of this gathering. Can you honestly answer how the world saw the arrival of this uninvited member? Is this how you want Islam to arrive at such gathering of humanity?

This are my question to you and others. And I hope your answer is categorical NO, and you do soul searching what Islam must choose - increase the circle of violence or throw the circle of violence out. If the answer is NO, then why not have the courage to say that this use of Koran / Islam / Muslims is unlawful and Islam will not tolerate it, and that this is not Islam. The followers of OBL are not muslim, they follow ``Binladinism`` not Islam.

If fatwas can be issued to declare Ahmadiyas are not muslim, then why no fatwas that OBL is not muslim, practitioners of such violence are not muslim.

4. ``Whom is the UK going to attack now? Where exactly does Al-Qaeda exist? It is not a country. It is not a city. At best, it could start targeting its own citizens. Which is probably exactly what Al-Qaeda wants UK to do. As for members of Al-Qaeda is, they, themselves are willing to die. So how exactly does one kill someone, who himself is ready to die.


This is not even the question worth asking, because you already know the answer - from Churchill`s famous speech on ``Battle of Britain`` ``.... on the beaches.... on the streets....`` The fight will be wherever the terror will take the fight.

5. ``The solution lies in assessing how much one is willing to give up, in order to carry out violence. Al-Qaeda is willing to give up everything. As are probably many of the citizens of Iraq - specifically those who have lost a lot in this war....``

If the situation is so hopless that Al Qaida has nothing to loose. Please tell when and where people or nations have negotiated with anyone who has nothing to loose. I can say the other side of your logic is that if Al Qaida is willing to give up everything, then the west is willing to make sure Al Qaida gives up everything, and that the West will only work on how fast and how soon it can create such a situation - a la Soviet Union.

6. ``This circle of violence is going to get larger and larger, and more and more people will get involved. The end of this circle of violence, lies, not in raising the war rhetoric, but in exiting from it........ ``

If Al Qaida, wants to increase the circle of violence, then do you think the West care that Al Qaida cares of Al Qaidas survival. More important question, if I were a muslim, would be do I, as a muslim, care that the rest of the humanity musst care about my religion of my choice. It is important for my self-esteem. Victory by Al Qaida or terror is not important for Islam (unless you think otherwise) for my religion to surivive, and not it is important for my self-esteem.

7. ``....makes no sense in getting into a pissing contest with someone who is willing to die for his cause (however, right or wrong the cause maybe)............One should only do that if one has nothing to lose..........``

8. ``Al-Qaeda has nothing to lose........UK has a lot to lose.......UK would be wise to fight Al-Qaeda inside the UK (if it exists)........It is being exceptionally naive in creating more Al-Qaeda by attacking Iraq........``

Irony is that you do not see what I, as a non-muslim, and certainly indirectly affected by the terror, like the rest of non-muslim do not see. Believe me, just as much as you believe in your religion, the West is not going down on its knees because Al Qaida has brought the terror to the streets of London / Europe from the streets of Bagdad.

9. ``The only country, out of the above list, that has a legitimate battle against Al-Qaeda, is Pakistan. Since Al-Qaida has infiltrated inside Pakistan.``

This infiltration into body fabric of Pakistan society is not that of Islam, which was always there. These are cancer cells which arrived later due to the life style Pakistan lead - like a person who smokes gets cancer, and cancer cells multiply. The terror like cancer cell would multiply. In a way Al Qaida taking terror to the Streets of Europe is good. Institutional funding of terror through Saudi oil money is being controlled, the private contributions from rich British - Pakistanis, French - Muslims, German - Muslims will now be controlled. The cancer cells will be attacked through radiation and chemo therapy within the body fabric. This is the only way to control cancer, and at this stage cancer is not so spread out that the west would die.

The choice is clear, and I believe Mushraff made a very smart choice. He needs the will power to administer the treatment of this cancer.

The west and even India has the determination to treat the cancer from their society. About time, a muslim society takes a lead. I see, Musharaff doing exactly that, and deserve the support.

Thank you.
Anil Kapuria

Dear Romair,

I think the brilliance of the facts staring you in the face have blinded you.

All day we have seen ex-pat Muslim ``leaders`` of South Asian and Arab origin bleating like Mary had a Little Lamb. ``Keep the peace, stay inside, protect us, worry about our women``. They are even crying in UAE, can you beat that, read Al Jazeera.

Butter wouldn`t melt in their mouth, so cold is the sweat of fear based on home truths.

No denying that?

On the other hand, have you seen any Muslim ``leaders`` from, say, the African or Far Eastern or American regions doing anything other than putting their shoulders with their fellow-countrymen and getting along with life?

Stand up, Romair, and be counted with the Muslims who are now saying, openly, enough is enough. If you can understand that, fine. If you really think that all Muslims are equal, then try it.

Otherwise go hide behind the skirts of the ``leaders`` crying on television right now.

I hope it answers your question?

No?

I thought so.

So here goes.

For 5 decades and more now, some of us, some of you, have shared this belief that we were descended from the wind of the horses racing in the desert. And that everybody else was haram. Habshee, goraa, cheenee, bungalee, chapta, aurat, chooraa, kafir, vagera vagera.

Now what?

I hope you understand now.

If you don`t, you can always join the dwindling ranks of those hiding behind the skirts of the ``leaders``.

+++

And the last I heard about Iraq, they were killing the (Muslim) Ambassador from Egypt.

+++

some alternate view points…

The Price of Occupation

George Galloway, George Monbiot, Stephen Grey

thomas friedman

vereesh #8: ``Yes, Temporal, and all the rest over here and our friends who are in the forefront again, please stand up and be counted, or forever keep your peace.``

There is something I have been trying to discuss with many of our Indian colleagues on this site. Something on which there seems to be a lot of confusion........

Whenever something related to Pakistan is being discussed, many of our Indian collegues tend to complain (and to some extent, though not completely, correctly) that Pakistanis tend to look towards Islam and their civilization and origin and community and culture. When, in fact, they should be looking towards South Asia, and not try to portray themselves as a part of an Ummah of some sort, i.e. they should not hail the raids of Ghaznavi and Ghauri, regardless of whether they were Muslims, or not.

However, the moment someone sets off a bomb in any area of the world, many of our Indian colleagues automatically put every Muslim into an Ummah, i.e. everyone is part of one Muslim civilization. Completely contrary to the original stand of wanting Pakistanis to prefer their cultural history over their religious history.......

Your comments seems to point in this direction......

There is a conflict going on between Iraq and America. Which UK has joined. And they are busy killing each others` civilians. It has now travelled from the streets of Baghdad to the streets of London. Something that was bound to happen. Even the British police said they knew it was inevitable.........

Now, why in the world are you calling Indian Muslims or Muslims anywhere else, to, ``stand up and be counted.`` One could understand you calling Iraqis or Arabs or Americans or Brits to stand up and be counted, for all this violence. But why call all the Muslims (or all the Christians, for that matter) to stand up.............

One can understand that Al-Qaeda views civilizations along reliigous lines. But do you, as well? It seems to me that you (and varoius others) tend to switch back and forth, as and when it seems convenient, i.e. when a bomb goes off, all Muslims are the same. However, when someone wants to discuss invasions of South Asia, or the cricket team of India, Muslims should forget they are Muslims and concentrate on their cultural and geographical heritage...........Could you kindly clarify this contradiction..........

Here`s a courageous, humane, and defiant statement from the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone (contrast this to the obscene and moral grandstanding statements by Bush & Blair):
``I want to say one thing specifically to the world today. This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever.

That isn’t an ideology, it isn’t even a perverted faith - it is just an indiscriminate attempt at mass murder and we know what the objective is. They seek to divide Londoners. They seek to turn Londoners against each other. I said yesterday to the International Olympic Committee, that the city of London is the greatest in the world, because everybody lives side by side in harmony. Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack. They will stand together in solidarity alongside those who have been injured and those who have been bereaved and that is why I’m proud to be the mayor of that city.

Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life.

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don’t want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail.”

#6

…there is no justification for such acts, not in my qur`an, not in my culture…

but temp…haven’t you heard? there is only ONE kind of muslim; the bearded pious kind…everyone else is a wannabe. you, me, and anyone else who wishes to join the happy circle of heathens may be engaged in self-deluding pretensions but muslims we aren’t. not only are we the “voice in the wilderness”, we are the wilderness.

rgds
miriam

One possible theory ..........

Radical leader says West may have `engineered` bomb blasts
08/07/2005 - 10:46:46
http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=63638044&p=63638346

A senior leader from a coalition of radical Islamic political parties today said the attacks in London might have been orchestrated by the West as a strategy to turn public opinion against Muslims, a claim sure to produce outrage around the globe.

“This is very tragic,” said Liaqat Baluch, a prominent politician from the six-party Islamic coalition that comprises the main opposition to President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

“But this could also be a strategy by Europe and America to line up against Muslims. They are directly saying Muslim groups or al-Qaida are behind these bombings. Then how can it be ruled out that these are not engineered blasts?” he said.

When asked again if he was actually charging the British or American governmnts of having a hand in the bombings, Baluch said: “This can not be ruled out. All countries do this to project their people as victims.”

Baluch demanded an “impartial investigation”.

The Islamic MP’s comments came a day after Musharraf called for a joint fight against terrorism following the London attack, which he vehemently condemned. Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed today refused to comment on Baluch’s remark. A British Embassy spokesman was not immediately available for comment.

Most Pakistanis reacted with horror to the news. Many have relatives in London, and the two nations remain historically linked nearly 60 years after the British quit the region upon the partition of the subcontinent into Pakistan and India.

Newspapers in Pakistan today splashed news of the London bombings as their top headlines.

“Apocalypse London” was the front page headline of The News, the nation’s largest English-language daily. The lead editorial in the paper read: “Al-Qaida strikes in London’s heart”.

The newspaper condemned the bombings and said: “The London attack has brought the war home that Britain has so far been fighting in far off Iraq.”

Baluch is the deputy head of Jamaat-e-Islami, the main group in a six-party coalition of Islamic political parties called Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal, or United Action Forum. The coalition has the second largest block in Pakistan’s parliament, and control or partial control of two of the nation’s four provinces.

The group has been vocal in its opposition to the US-led war against terrorism, and Musharraf’s decision to ally Pakistan with the fight.

Baluch said terrorism “is increasing” and the international community, especially America, should find out the causes of terrorism and “address them with justice”.

Islamic groups oppose US support for Israel and want Washington to pull troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

In a message to British Prime Minister Tony Blair yesterday, Musharraf, said: “It is imperative that we stand together and further strengthen our bonds of cooperation to eliminate this menace.”

Musharraf has outlawed several homegrown militant groups – some with links to the Taliban and al-Qaida – in line with a policy to eliminate extremism from the conservative Muslim nation.

He has survived at least three attempts on his life, which authorities say al-Qaida was behind.

Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who also survived a suicide bomber’s assassination bid, also expressed grief over the “shocking news of the bomb explosions in central London”, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement late yesterday.

Re: # 18

...... people like liaqat baluch should be locked up in guantanamo, sewing caps and writing the koran, instead of sitting in parliament and spouting nonsense ........... but he is not alone since there is no shortage of conspiracy theory idiots in the ummah - i am sure we will soon see people like echoboom voicing similar views on this forum .........

Reminds me of that episode in Spider Man movie. The juvenile spider-man let`s a criminal go who later kills his uncle.

When terrorists attacked and killed other lesser people, like Indians or afgans - US, UK and the west just sat there watching and gigling and pontificating. They took no actions - in fact, they actively hindered any action that the victim countries may have taken to crush the terror .... and in some cases, they actually sheltered the terrorists.

Now the same terrorists have paid them in the same coin. The immortal line in the movie - ``with great power comes great responsibilty``. - the great powers of the west had neglected their responsibilities. And the results are disastrous for people all around.

There is still time. The great powers of the west should have to wake up and take charge. Islamic terrorism and their sponsors have to be crushed. The time is now.