Skyrad

Misunderstood you, sorry. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Sorry semantics, but Arabs are racially Semitic. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Thats a load of cobblers. I could say the same of Catholism PIRA, INLA, RIRA, ETA all terrorism groups all Catholic, guess all Catholics are terrorists What about the inquisition? Mass terror organised by the Pope and vatican! Yet more proof! Stupid eh? Yea, about as stupid as your statement. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

'and would have arguably over-emphasized terrorism in the UK.' Not sure what you mean by that Tom, but this thread is about terrorism in the UK, as were the remarks made that initialy illicited a response from Storm1977. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Only works if you're comparing apples with apples. Comparing the PLO (Which legaly has a office here in London) which is a political group with Islamist millitant groups makes as much sense as comparing against Irish terrorist groups. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Your view is backed up by those in the know as well. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1739947;#1739947 When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

FYI the PLFP and the PLO are/were political in their aims and not Islamic extreamists. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

No IRA bombings are included? Why is that? Were they not terrorists? If not why not? Could it be that that would be embarrasing seeing as Americans gave them £18 Million a year via NORAID to buy semtex to blow women and children to shit with. As for this public annoyance happening in London right now, it's hard to say if anyone has been killed yet seeing as we haven't been able to rule out biological agents being dispersed by IED. P.S......Nice pic Caz When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I don't think that the model is wrong, it works in the US for many reasons but I don't belive that it is the only model and neither do I belive that it will export well as the conditions for it to flourish in a long term sustainable way do not exist in the vast majority of nations outside of the US. As for the US being the cause of all the worlds woes, I don't subscribe to that either. However i think Rhino is correct in saying that the US is in for a big change. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Thanks, I spent a while last night giving it some thought. Suprised there's no comments either way on my view. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Tony Blair’s positioning of Britain as a “pillion passenger” to the US war on terror is proving a key problem in preventing terrorism in Britain, a respected think-tank will on Monday warn. The Royal Institute of International Affairs will also claim there is “no doubt” the war on Iraq has imposed “particular difficulties” for the UK’s counter-terrorism efforts. Hmmm.....'The Stranger'???? or the FT? No FT? No comment. http://news.ft.com/cms/s/e7b346dc-f6ec-11d9-aeff-00000e2511c8,dwp_uuid=46d6f5a8-d260-11d8-b661-00000e2511c8.html The report, which was commissioned long before the London bombings, is a setback for the prime minister, who has insisted the attacks had no direct connection with Britain’s support for the US over Iraq and Afghanistan. The institute argues in the report, co-written with the Economic and Social Research Council, that the conflict in Iraq, designed to counter state-sponsored terrorism, has damaged the UK and the wider coalition against terror. “It gave a boost to the al-Qaeda network’s propaganda, recruitment and fundraising, cause a major split in the coalition, provided an ideal targeting and training area for al-Qaeda linked terrorists and deflected resources and assistance that could have been deployed to assist the Karzai government [in Afghanistan],” the report states. Britain’s ability to tackle terrorism has been damaged by its commitment to stand shoulder to shoulder with the US, leaving it as a “pillion passenger compelled to leave the steering to the ally in the driving seat”, the report says. “Riding pillion with a powerful ally has proved costly in terms of British and US military lives, Iraqi lives, military expenditure, and the damage caused to the counter-terrorism campaign.” The UK was slow to react to the threat posed by Islamist terrorist activity, the report says. It states that by the mid-1990s, the UK’s intelligence agencies were “well aware” that London was being used as a base by individuals linked to terrorism in the Middle East but did not regard them as a threat to national security. But the report broadly supported the more recent approach taken to counter the al-Qaeda threat, saying that notwithstanding the failure to predict the July 7 bombings, “the UK has rightly placed a major response emphasis on intelligence-led action to disrupt potential terrorists”. The think-tank’s warning about the effects of Iraq on the terrorist threat in the UK will fuel dissent on the left wing of the Labour party over the domestic risk created by Mr Blair’s foreign policy. John McDonnell, a leftwing MP, claimed it was “intellectually unsustainable” to suggest the bombings were not linked to the invasion of Iraq. Clare Short, the former Labour cabinet minister, told the GMTV Sunday Programme there was “no doubt” Iraq was a factor. But Sadiq Khan, the Labour Muslim MP for Tooting, warned it was “very dangerous” to make a direct connection between Iraq and the attacks. “It’s a very simple and easy thing to do . . . but I think it’s more complex than that,” he said. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

You mean like self made shits? This thread is fantastic When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

One has to look at the problem holistically. There is no simple quick fix in this war on the militants. This is a war which if it to be successful must be fought on many fronts. These primarily can be broken down into the following ‘fronts’ Military, Political and Diplomatic. By the very nature of these fronts, a dialogue must be opened with the enemy be it indirectly via third party brokers or directly. Military action when fighting an unconventional Asymmetrical war in which the UK/US are engaged must be intelligence led, low profile (If not covert) and targeted. Collateral damage is counter productive and is of great value to the enemy, great measures should be taken to avoid such damage. Targets should only be eliminated when their intelligence value is outweighed by the risk of their continuing existence, when this point is reached decisive action to remove them should ensue swiftly but in such a manner that minimum risk to non combatants is achieved. As already mentioned in this thread, Al Qaeda is not a cohesive group but a flat organisation of many groupings. This is both their strength and their weakness. There is no head to cut off this dragon but the separate groups are held together in certain places by ‘link men’ these players by their very nature must connect between groupings and by their exposure they are vulnerable as are the cells they contact. Political, to remove the support of the militants one must first remove the causes of the grievances to which they rally their troops. There are the obvious ones, these being the Palestinian issue (to which Al Qaeda has strategically aligned itself) as well as the Iraq situation (which itself is a symptom of US/UK philosophy on foreign economic policy) and the belief on which these policies are founded. American universalism, the belief that the US government now has, that the American way is the only way forwards for the world. This was the view submitted to the US congress in the US defence doctrine paper on 20th Sept 2002. In which it states that the last century ended with ‘a decisive victory for the forces of freedom and a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy and free enterprise’. In this light pre emptive strikes of the nature of Afghanistan and Iraq make sense to many Americans but to those outside America they are seen as an attempt to remake the world in an American image. As we have seen in Iraq overt pre-emption does not lead to the end of terrorism but simply to a fertile recruitment ground for terrorists. American plans for regime change increases suspicion and hostility among those governments that the US needs the support of to change the balance of popular local support away from the terrorists. Attacking ‘Rouge states’ is counter productive as it does not disable terrorist networks and terrorist groups flourish in failed states and states where there is no discernable government. America has a military power unrivalled today, but that power has to be driven by an unassailable economy, which America no longer has. The US is the worlds largest debtor (Japan being the strongest economy) the military can not therefore be sustained in its overseas campaigns for any longitudinal period and the American public are not willing to pay the blood price for empire building. This means that the US needs to recruit allies in the region and across the world to continue the war by proxy; alienation of other states is therefore counterproductive to the aims of the war. American values work only in America due to the socioeconomic cultural circumstances that exist there and they do not export well even to ‘similar’ European mother cultures. To attempt to impose them on Islamic Arab/Asian nations is likely to end in chaos in much the same way that Woodrow Wilson’s attempt to implement national self determination in central and Eastern Europe did after WWI. Political: Economic. America now argues that ‘Market States’ are the only legitimate mode of government but that isn’t to say fiscal buoyancy in the ‘global economy’ is the most important requirement. The belief that a state must work for prosperity of its citizens as a ‘Market State’ in the infant ‘global economy’ is not as important as a state that meets the human needs of security from violence and disorder and recognition of cultural identity. America is going to have to swallow the bitter pill that such states need not be democracies. People will often chose a strong state over a weak democracy if it fulfils their needs. Strong states better fulfil suppression of terrorism than failed or eroded weak states in which they grow. As has ever been the case in politics fear is more potent than hope of gain. (As Senator, John Kerry learnt to his expense) states that deliver safety are more legitimate than those that promise wealth. The ‘Market State’ is an American invention best left in America. The spreading of democracy is counter-productive to the US/UK war aims in the war on terror. If the house of Saud were to fall, the main stated aim of Al Qaeda would be accomplished. If democracy were to be installed in Saudi Arabia the house of Saud would fall, the Wahibists would take power and Al Qaeda would have a choke hold on the hydrocarbon fuelled economy of the US/UK. Condoleezza Rice speaking about democracy in Arabia along with US plans of regime changes have given hope to the enemy and helped to undermine the Saudi government as well as alienate an ally. The spreading of democracy has to be dropped by the US if it wishes to beat Al Qaeda. In Arab states the belief in the American model is rejected and attempts to impose it will only unite the US enemies further. On a local level recruitment of Halwala ‘bankers’ and couriers must be carried out to gain intelligence on fund movement so that the fiscal taps can be screwed down on the terror groups. Diplomacy: America due to its unsustainable economic situation and domestic political situation must gain the assistance of the UN, NATO, SEATO the EU, the Arab league and the League of African Nations in its fight against Al Qaeda if legitimacy is to be given to its actions, it must no longer be seen to pursue the road of isolationism. This will also assist in removing an argument of its critics and a tool for recruiters of its enemy. It is also no use to carry a large stick if one does not also how to speak softly. Honey is easier to swallow than vinegar and whilst the use of targeted lethal force should be used, incentives for those that help must also be given. Where possible they should have an effect on the indigenous populations of hostile areas not ‘just’ line the pockets of officials. America now has a Christian fundamentalist government, which is part of the drive to remould the Middle East in the belief that a major conflict will fulfil biblical prophecies of a conflict in the region. It uses terms of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ with no apparent regard for the lessons of history, that yesterdays enemies are now our allies. American values are not universal values and attempts to impose them outside of the US will result not in people believing they have been liberated but oppressed. In summary, Al Qaeda is a modern enemy, it uses global multi media communications, targets economic institutions and is highly mass media aware using attacks on symbolic targets to disseminate its message. Its ideology is also modern as it believes that acts of terror can bring about a better world in which it belives. This owes more to Bolshevik & Neo Marxist ideology than to Islam. To defeat Al Qaeda a total war of a different kind must be waged, and Wahabism is just the kindergarten. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Thanks When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Maybe that read wrong, what I mean is if they are citizens of elsewhere deport them/ban them from the UK. If they are British citizens (ie:homegrown) prosecute them within the UK. The British Gov are currently making laws to stop people from glorifying terrorism, though I question their need to do so. I would have thought that there is current legislation that covers this. MrMK2 any thoughts? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

LOL...Only joking When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

I've had an interesting week, my father is in a state of shock as are the vast majority of British Muslims, he kept asking me why did tey do such a thing. Actualy i was quite shocked to find out that he holds republican views on the war in Iraq! Today 500 Islamic clerics from Mosques across Britan are issuing a Fatwah condeming the suicide bombings as Un Islamic and a mortal sin. The Muslim council of Britan are strongly condeming the crimes and along with the Mosques are asking people to go to the police with any information that they have. At least one of the families of the suicide bombers has appologised to the public for the action of their son, they had no idea of what he was doing and have described what he did as an evil act, they have furthur asked the community to help the police. I think the way forwards is to deport the extreamists from overseas that preach hate and to prosectute those that are home grown. I'd like to see Islam put back into the hands to the moderates. That means along with the legal approch of cutting off the mouth piece of the 'radicals' we have to also make young British Muslims feel accepted as Brits. I think that the government is on the right tracks but we also need to have more informants from within the Muslim community in Britan. As for the Wahabi influence they need to be stomped on in Pakistan, Eygypt, Yemen and elsewhere not by us or the US but by the respective governments. Unfortunatly the rot has been allowed to develop over the last two decades and they have been pretty cleaver in gaining positions of influence. I always knew that this day would come, anyone who went to a mosque in the 80's could have forseen it. I remember discussing it with my brother back in '85. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Theres no such thing as Al Quieda in the manisfestation that the UK and US would have us belive. Its just a bogeyman umberella title to cover dozens or Islamic groups accross the world. If we now are begining to see groups calling themselves Al Quaida they should have 'Made in the US/UK' stamped on their arses. Al Quieda just means 'The Base' and orignialy refered to a hostel in Peshawa in Pakistan that fighters would take RnR at or use to travel to and from the war against the Russians in Afghanistan. It suits the US's purpose to have a mastermind controling a highly organised international terrorist organisation just as it does for the UK and the Russians. I wouldn't be suprised to find out that the London bombers were acting on their own 'opperationally' made the explosives themselves having been indoctrinated at some Wahibist school in Pakistan. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Yes Frenchmen do go around kissing each other damn bizare behaviour if you ask me. But they also eat horses,boiled Lambs brain, snails and frogs legs then have the cheek to comment on our food! For reasons of being kind to the Frenchys Waterloo Train Station has a partial exculsion order to the Act which allows them Frenchys to say good bye to each other before they get on the Eurostar to go through the tunnel back to France. Personaly I think its an errosion of our way of life and we should make the buggers shake hands like respectable Englishmen. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Mmmmm.....Monkey love, my faviourite! Second only to a good hot mug of monkey tea! Well, I am suprised that people didn't know tht its illegal to hug in public, Scotland has changed their law on this slightly. in England until 1985 it was illegal for a man and a woman who were not married to hold hands in public on a Sunday. It is also illegal to have a pigsty outside your house in London. Did you know that it is illegal to enter the Houses of Parliament in a suit of armour or that until 1976 cab drivers were required by law to carry a bale of hay to feed a horse? And it is still illegal for cabbies to carry rabid dogs or corpses and by law they must ask all passengers if they have small pox or the plague. It is law that requires Royal Navy ships which enter the Port of London to provide a barrel of rum to the Constable of the Tower of London. And it is still an offence to beat or shake any carpet rug or mat in any street in the Metropolitan Police District, although you are allowed to shake a doormat before 8am. Also until recent trading laws came into effect you could sell a newspaper on a Sunday but not fish and chips. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

You had no idea???? Are you kidding? I thought everyone knew that. Is it really unusual in America? When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Hi, no you didn't hit a nerve I was just setting the record straight, didn't mean to sound strident. OK, heres some information on the bombers you wanted. The source is todays Telegraph newspaper. Profiles of the London four (Filed: 13/07/2005) Here are the profiles of the four who are suspected of carrying out the first suicide bombings in Britain, in which at least 52 people have died. At least three were young British-born men with Pakistan backgrounds who lived near Leeds. The fourth is believed to have come from Luton. The youngest was 18, and the oldest 30. Documents belonging to the four were recovered at the scene of the four blasts. Shehzad Tanweer, 22, of Beeston, Leeds, is believed to have been the Liverpool Street bomber, killing six other people. A cricket-loving sports science graduate who was described as a "good Muslim". Born in Bradford and is believed to have attended a comprehensive school in Leeds. His father owns a fish and chip shop. Described by a friend as a "very kind person who would get along with anyone and anybody. He's the kind of guy who would condemn extremism." Lived in the same semi-detached house all his life. He had travelled to Afghanistan and Pakistan within the last six months. Hasib Mir Hussain, 18, from Holbeck, Leeds, is believed to been the Number 30 bus bomber in Tavistock Square, killing 12 other people. It is known that his driving licence and cash cards were found in the mangled wreckage of the number 30 bus, in which 13 people died. He had told his parents, who he lived with in a red-brick terraced house, that he was going to London with friends on the day of the attacks and at 10.20pm last Thursday his mother reported him missing to the police - apparently fearing he may have been caught in the tragedy. Detectives are examining the possibility that he either panicked or changed his mind over the suicide mission and carried his bomb on to the bus. It might have gone off accidentally or he could have set it off, perhaps after being challenged by passengers. Another theory is that three bombers travelled west, east and south on the London Underground from King's Cross and the fourth was supposed to go north but the Northern Line was closed that day. Hussain left Matthew Murray High School in Leeds less than two years ago, education officials in the city confirmed. Despite a good attendance record he was withdrawn by teachers from all his GCSE exams and took only a GNVQ in Business Studies. Neighbours said he had become "very religious" two years ago. Mohammed Sadique Khan, a 30-year-old from Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, blew himself up on the Edgware Road train, killing six other people, police believe. Like Tanweer he seemed an unlikely suicide bomber. Friends said he was married with an eight-month-old baby girl and that he worked with disabled children in a primary school. All three men were believed to have been friends but not related. A fourth bomber, 22, is thought to have lived in the Luton area and the West Yorkshire men are understood to have used hire cars to travel to Luton last Thursday morning. He is believed to have set off the explosives between King's Cross and Russell Square. All four bombers boarded a Thameslink rail service to King's Cross last Thursday, where they were captured on CCTV just before 8.30am. They then split up, three of them detonating their bombs on separate trains simultaneously at 8.50am. The bus bomb detonated 57 minutes later. Detectives and the security services fear there could still be a second suicide bomb team waiting to strike and that an al-Qa'eda mastermind could have orchestrated the attacks before fleeing the UK. The bombers appear to be the security services' worst nightmare, so-called "clean skins", apparently ordinary young men who had not previously come to the attention of the authorities. "How many clean skins have we got waiting in the wings?" a senior security source said. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

A Muslim man was kicked to death today in Nottingham as he left a corner shop, his murderers chanted 'Taliban, Taliban, Taliban' as they kicked him to death. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

So whats the big deal? In England it is illegal to hug at school, the work place or indeed any public place. Its an offence under the Public indecency Act of 1947 (Section 2 subsection 9 clause 4.7) It was introduced to stop promiscuity after WWII and is still enforced throughout the country and is punishable by a £1000 fine or seven days imprisonment. Don't worry though if you are a forigener the Police will normally let you off with a warning or turn a blind eye. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Considering many of them came to Europe after WW2 as "Temporary Guest Workers" and were allowed to stay because of politicians sympathetic to them. Unlike the U.S. where we are a country of Immigrants, many Muslims in Europe aren't as readily accepted and harbour deep seated hatred about being forced into enclaves. Seems a bit xenophobic and racist. The question is what can be done? That maybe true in Continental Europe but over here in Britan Muslims came from many countries around the world to the UK where the majority integrated into the UK without living in ghettos. Yes there are areas that are more Muslim than others (For example three of the bombs went off in Muslims areas of London as the northerners that came down here to do the job wern't locals they didn't know or care) as for the hate bit thats a load of crap. Its only a few radicals and judging all Muslims by the actions of these murderers is like judging all Catholics by the actions of the IRA murderers. Besides which these murderers were born here. If you come to the UK and get knocked over by a car & get taken to hospital you'll find that theres a good chance that the Dr is a Muslim, get a prescription and go to the Pharmacy theres a good chance that the Pharmacist is a Muslim, get a Lawer to sue and fair chance he ill be a Muslim as well, along with your Accountant and your kids teacher. Muslims in the UK are in the majority not down trodden oppressed and live in nice areas and good homes just like anyone else. Of course there are some (Mainly up north) that live in dumps but they have integrated so well they're just like any other northerner. When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca