I'd be more convinced by your point if 11 French submarine technicians hadn't been killed in Karachi and there hadn't been an attack on the French ship Limburg in Yemen. After all they can hardly be described as supporters of the war.

The likes of Abu Hamza are fairly open about how much they despise Western decadence.

Posted by: Anon at July 7, 2005 11:32 PM

James, you researched your book well before writing it (whether people agree with your conclusions or not).

But here I'd suggest that you are outside your area of expertise and into personal prejudice. This doesn't do much for your credibility on the issues that this blog generally covers, unfortunately. I don't generally have much time for Tony Blair or Ken Livingstone, but on this subject they are right.

I suggest that you read Amir Taheri's piece in today's Times. His point, essentially, is that these people want to impose their autocratic (theocratic) views on other people by force - usually in their own countries - and the problem is that the US and UK (in particular) are helping to prevent them.

I quote Amir Taheri here: "But sorry, old chaps, you are dealing with an enemy that does not want anything specific, and cannot be talked back into reason through anger management or round-table discussions. Or, rather, this enemy does want something specific: to take full control of your lives, dictate every single move you make round the clock and, if you dare resist, he will feel it his divine duty to kill you. "

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-1684970,00.html

Posted by: HJHJ at July 8, 2005 10:18 AM

I have to say that, personally, I found the Mayor's words very appropriate and heartfelt, and they struck a chord with me. I can't see what James objected to in them. The quote I'm thinking of was the one about the indiscriminate nature of the attacks: Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old.

Posted by: Steve D at July 8, 2005 10:30 AM

You may think the reasons of the terrorists are bizarre, but to them they are not.

One of the problems I have with people like you is that they are so willing to assume that others think as they do. They don't.

I also take issue with Jack Straw describing this as "mindless". It is no such thing. It is a deliberate well-planned assault on a democratic nature - inspired by an sickening ideology. It is many things, but mindless is not one of them.

Posted by: Eric at July 8, 2005 01:54 PM

Hi James,
Like the others, I will have to disagree with your points. The people who perpetrated this atrocity declared war on the rest of us a long time before the invasion of Iraq. If Iraq is given as an excuse, it is just that: an excuse. It would be something else.

Regards,
James G.

Posted by: James G. at July 8, 2005 02:13 PM

James

These people want us to return Afghanistan rule to the Taleban. Would you support that? Were we right to intervene?

When Theo Van Gogh was being shot multiple times he begged for his life with the words "surely we can discuss this". Discussion and compromise are the hallmark of democracy. His killers didn't believe in democracy. How does that fit into your narrative?

Your understanding of welfare is spot on. A pity you can't see past the Guardian/BBC "root cause" narrative.

Posted by: John at July 8, 2005 04:20 PM

PS: Here's a useful map showing Islamist attacks since 1993.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/010966.php

Given that most attacks predate the 2nd Iraq war but postdate the first, I guess you will logically say we were wrong then too.

Posted by: John at July 8, 2005 04:59 PM

On quite a different note: listening to Radio 4 coverage yesterday afternoon, I was absolutely nauseated by the steady succession of desk wallahs who did little but congratulate themselves for their contingency planning. I would give anything to hear the private comments of the policemen, ambulance drivers and firemen who were the real heros of the day. On Radio 4, one got the impression that this was a real triumph for the principle of inter-agency co-operation (shorthand for endless meetings and ever-expanding bureaucracy), and that it had nothing to do with the fact that the men on the ground in the emergency services work with each other virtually every day.

The only intelligent comment I heard on Radio 4 was from a woman who said that the only thing to do was to put the whole thing behind us with as little fuss as possible. How much hope there is of this in this touchy-feely, post-Diana age, I cannot say.

Posted by: tom burkard at July 8, 2005 05:25 PM

Nil. It'll keep the counsellors in work for months.

People aren't allowed to buckle down and get on with life, they must *feel* everything. God alone knows what would have happened if we'd had this in WW2 ; the D-Day Landings wouldn't have been soldiers but counsellors to help the Germans come to terms with their pain, and they'd probably have been stopped under Health and Safety Legislation anyway.

At the risk of being accused of brown nosing the moderator ; he doesn't actually state that "it is because of the Iraq war".

The argument seems to me to be more along the lines of Blair is worried about people coming to that conclusion.

(Unless Blair is stupid he must have considered this, as the Madrid bombings were thought to have a significant effect on the election there)

I think there's some truth in this. Whilst it is too simple to say "this is because of Gulf War 1 & 2" it is a less simplistic argument than "they hate our freedoms" (which Bush started in similar circs. for the same reasons) which really doesn't mean *anything* at all.

Comically, and unsurprisingly, while Blair is going on about our Freedoms and deluding himself he is Churchill, Clarke is telling us that we'll have to lose some "civil liberties" no doubt including his b---- ID card in this.

So, if the Terrorist *are* trying to destroy our freedom, then they are winning. If this is really about hating our way of life, don't they win if we change it for them ?

PS: Tom B, you asked how Addition was taught ; there's something about this at :- http://primaryschoolteacher.blogspot.com under "Numeracy".

Posted by: Paul at July 9, 2005 09:34 AM