Anti-War Forces Condemn The London Bombings

by Patrique Thu Jul 07, 2005 16:28

I admit it is terrible to have a mind like mine, but suddenly the G8 is now about the war on terror, and global emissions and world poverty are now on the back burner.

Fortunate timing on this one, just like the "attack" in New York provided a handy excuse for invading all sorts of places.

I hope I am wrong, but could MI5 be responsible?

by Joe Thu Jul 07, 2005 16:37

It was already quite clear last night that the G8 would deliver nothing (but then this was also quite clear last year or last decade to anyone who gives any thought to what the G8 is see http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=871 )

So the idea that M15 would cause billions of pounds of damage to the British economy as a distraction from what has already been admitted makes little sense. What is more by putting about an unlikely conspiracy like this as a reasonable possibility your just going to make G8 protesters in general look like nut cases.

On top of this there obviously are groups out there with the motivation and means to carry out this bombing. The obvious assumption to start with is that the probably did it. Why look to invent some complex conspiracy?

by Paul Moloney Thu Jul 07, 2005 16:46 paul_moloney at hotmail dot com

>I admit it is terrible to have a mind like >mine

You took the words right out of my mouth.

P.

by Shay Thu Jul 07, 2005 17:23

Whoever is responsible, and it looks like some islamic group al qaeda or not planned this to coincide with the G8. They've struck the financial heart of the UK while it is hosting the G8.
And maybe the fact that London has just been awarded the Olympics has been an unexpected bonus for them.

by Patrique Thu Jul 07, 2005 17:33

I see I have some supporters on another thread.

All violent acts are to be condemned, but you see I am from N.Ireland and you wouldn't believe who was behind many of the atrocities committed here, not to mention who bombed Dublin in 1974.

So my theory, unfortunately, is not that far fetched.

by Masters Voice Thu Jul 07, 2005 17:38 mastersvoice at dublin dot ie

Statement on the London bombings by George Galloway on behalf of Respect
07/07/2005

We extend our condolences to the families and loved ones of those who have lost their lives today and our heartfelt sympathy to all those who have been injured by the bombs in London.

No one can condone acts of violence aimed at working people going about their daily lives. They have not been a party to, nor are they responsible for, the decisions of their government. They are entirely innocent and we condemn those who have killed or injured them.

The loss of innocent lives, whether in this country or Iraq, is precisely the result of a world that has become a less safe and peaceful place in recent years.

We have worked without rest to remove the causes of such violence from our world. We argued, as did the security services in this country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat of terrorist attack in Britain. Tragically Londoners have now paid the price of the government ignoring such warnings.

We urge the government to remove people in this country from harms way, as the Spanish government acted to remove its people from harm, by ending the occupation of Iraq and by turning its full attention to the development of a real solution to the wider conflicts in the Middle East.

Only then will the innocents here and abroad be able to enjoy a life free of the threat of needless violence.

George Galloway, Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow

with wespect,
MV

by Conspiracy of Oppression Thu Jul 07, 2005 17:46

No doubt that the use of religous extremists to deal with opponents has been the stock of the admin in the USA and Britain.

Coming from the six counties though P, you'll know that sometimes the trained become trainers for their own petty ambitions, keeping an acceptable level of violence.

No conspiracy theory is needed here...the use of bombs on "innocents" in a multi faith and multi cultural country..whose government ignored the overwhelming will of the people by invading and occupying iraq..divide and rule now does that not sound familiar !

The oppression of dissent is a trait of both the bombers and those who bomb Iraq for democracy.

by tom Thu Jul 07, 2005 17:47

Patrique is right to be suspicious about British intelligent agencies : they have a historic strategy of "turning" legitimite anti-imperialist movements towards terrorism so as to isolate them from any mass movement that would seriously threaten the imperialist set-up.
That's not to say that Mi5committed this atrocity . Why should they when the tactics of al Qaida fits their agenda so neatly? By planting a bomb in Aldgate underground station - in the heart of London's Muslim community - the bombers showed a profound contempt for the very people they claim to be fighting for.
British intelligence must be thinking to themselves -"With enemies like these , who needs friends ?"It would be like the IRA planting a no-warning bomb at Cricklewood Station . I can see how the craziness of it would make people wonder who was really behind it .

by Leila Fri Jul 08, 2005 05:33

Just what I expected to find on this site, lunatics using this horific act to back up their own agendas.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

by Michael Quinn Fri Jul 08, 2005 06:31 mpq at campus dot ie

I don' t think the bomb near Aldgate was meant to target the Muslim communities specifically; the train was also near Liverpool Street station, which is the main business district. More surprising, from a motive point of view were the attacks in Bloomsbury - at Tavistock Square and Russell Square. This is a museum and hotel district, so perhaps tourists and other commuters were the targets.

by Joe Fri Jul 08, 2005 14:16

There is also a Southern African anarchist statement at

by Frontliner Fri Jul 08, 2005 15:55

SSP Research, Policy & Media Unit
Press Release: 07/07/05

SSP statement on London bombings

The Scottish Socialist Party today sends it's condolences to the families of those killed and injured in today's bombings in London. The SSP condemns outright the bombings which were targeted at working class Londoners going about their daily lives. Many of those dead and injured would have participated in anti-war protests and would have taken part in the Make Poverty History protests over the past week.

Meanwhile, the men responsible for the war on Iraq and the massacre of 100,000 civilians were safely cocooned behind fortified walls 500 miles away, protected by thousands of police and armed forces. Today's horrific events further expose the falsity of the claims by Tony Blair and George Bush that the wars on Afghanistan and Iraq have turned the world into a safer place.

Exactly the opposite: the world is now darker and more dangerous than ever before. Today's wave of destruction also underlines the futility of trying to defeat terror by ever more repressive legislation. As the escalating violence in Iraq and Afghanistan illustrates, even the most ferocious repression cannot quell violence and terror. The most effective action Tony Blair could now take to make the UK a safer place is to pull all British troops out of Iraq. We note that neo-Nazi extremists are already trying to exploit today's tragedy to whip up fear and hatred towards the Muslim population, the vast majority of whom completely reject acts of violence carried out against innocent civilians. The SSP pledges to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Muslim community against all forms of racism and Islamosphobia.

Today's horrific events are a further indictment of the world that the G8 leaders have created. Until the swamps of poverty, war and injustice are drained, countless thousands more innocent people will die needlessly in the months and years to come.

by British and Irish Anarchists - See below Fri Jul 08, 2005 18:10

British & Irish Anarchist Statement

As social anarchists and libertarian communists, we deplore the horrific attacks on innocent people this morning in London. We express our deepest sympathy to anyone affected by the blasts. We condemn the use of violence against ordinary people and the perpetrators of the bombings whether they be Islamists or anyone else.

Terrorist actions are completely at odds with any struggle for a freer, fairer society and never help oppressed people in any part of the globe. Instead violence against civilians is a tool of states and proto-states every bit as brutal as the ones they profess to oppose.

The British Government, by sending British soldiers to kill and die in Iraq and Afghanistan has made all of us a target for terrorists in their pursuit of increased profit and power at the expense of ordinary working people.

We stand for a world in which human solidarity and co-operation replace the quest for profit as society's driving force, and stand in solidarity with all people fighting exploitation and oppression in all its forms, from opponents to the occupation of Iraq here, to those in Iraq who are opposing both the occupying forces and the ultra-reactionary Islamists the Occupation helps strengthen.

Our thoughts today are with the victims of this atrocity, and their loved ones.

Statement Signed by (so far):
Libcom.org Group
Anarchist Federation
IAF-IFA Secretariat
Class War
Colchester Solidarity Group
West Midlands Anarchists
Burnley Voice
Ipswich Anarchists
Norwich Anarchists
Freedom Newspaper
Organise!
Preston Solidarity Federation
Red Party

by CWI - CWI (international of Irish Socialist Party) Fri Jul 08, 2005 18:13

CWI statement on the London bombings

No to terrorism – No to war

For mass united working class action against imperialism and capitalism

CWI statement on the London bombings 8th July 2005

Four bombs, three at tube stations or on trains and one on a bus, shook London during the morning ‘rush hour’ of Thursday 7 July. The Socialist Party in England and Wales and the CWI condemn these bombings and those who carried them out.

At the time of writing there are more than 50 fatalities and over 700 injured. However, tragically this figure is likely to rise. 10 were killed on the bus which was bombed. The bus was a number 30 which runs from the working class district of Hackney Wick up to central London and was full of working class people. It appears that three tube trains were bombed and there are reports that the bus bombing was carried out by a suicide bomber. Like the 100,000 killed since the occupation of Iraq by US and British imperialism or those killed in the New York and Madrid attacks, those who died were overwhelmingly ordinary working people.

Although these bombings targeted central London, most of those affected were clerical workers, transport workers, students and other public sector employees. The majority of the British population opposed the war in Iraq. Many of the victims probably joined the massive anti-war demonstrations which took place in London and other cities in England and Wales, including the massive 2 million strong anti war protest on 15 February 2003.

In the main it is an attack on the working class of London. One of the bombed tube trains exploded between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East station. Aldgate East is a run down poor area with a large Muslim population. It was not an attack on the rich or capitalism.

The London Mayor, Ken Livingstone rightly declared: “This is a terrorist attack against working class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old…This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at presidents or prime ministers”.

Unfortunately, Ken Livingstone has not drawn the right conclusions from his own remarks. He rejoined the party which supported the war on Iraq and has implemented vicious anti-working class neo-liberal in Britain and internationally rather then begin to build a new party that would represent working class Londoners.

Like in other attacks many workers and ordinary people intervened to try and help the injured. Bus drivers took the injured to hospital. Clothing store workers took clothes from the shops to put on those whose clothing was torn from them by the blast. Fire crews, tube workers, ambulance workers and rank and file policemen lent assistance to passengers and passers.

This was in contrast to the big London hotels whose owners in some cases tripled prices for rooms for the night to try and make a quick financial profit from those who could not get home.

Following the attacks the entire London, tube net-work was shut down and all bus services in central London were cancelled. Train and bus travel to the rest of the country was seriously disrupted and services suspended from many main line stations.

After the initial reports of the first explosion London Transport management issued a statement which blamed it on a ‘power surge’. It was the Rail Maritime and Transport workers union (RMT) which announced that it was a terrorist attack.

The reactionary nature of al-Qa’eda

Although most Londoners have been shaken by these bombings some form of terrorist attack has been long expected. It seems that this outrage was carried out by an al-Qa’eda linked organisation which justified it because of the imperialist wars and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. A previously unknown organisation, the ‘Secret Organisation of al-Qa’eda of Jihad in Europe’ has claimed responsibility and threatened that further attacks will be organised in Italy and Denmark. This claim still needs to be verified.

Al-Qa’eda is not an organisation of national liberation which struggles for the interests of the oppressed peoples in Muslim countries. As the CWI commented at the time of the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York it is a reactionary organisation backed by rich Saudi Arabians. The policies and methods it defends do not champion the rights of the oppressed or the mass of the Muslim peoples. It attacks the rights and interests of the working class and poor Muslims and fosters ethnic conflict and sectarianism amongst them. In countries like Britain these actions make the lives of Muslims and others from ethnic minorities even harder and increases discrimination against them. Socialists cannot lend any support or sympathy to such an organisation.

The indiscriminate nature of the attacks carried out by al-Que’ada organisations – targeting innocent working people of all races and religions shows the contempt they have for the mass of people. They do not direct their attacks at the ruling class in the imperialist countries or their political representatives. They attack “soft targets” without warning meaning most of their victims are working class people. As one analyst put it: “Their philosophy is: why attack a tiger when there are so many sheep?...” indicating their contempt for working class people.

Socialists have always opposed the methods of individual terrorism which subjugates the mass mobilisation of working people for the actions of a small group. These methods only serve to strengthen the ruling class and capitalism. However, in the past, 19th century terrorist groups in Russia and other countries at least targeted individual rulers or leaders rather than innocent victims. The effect of such indiscriminate killings, such as those carried out by al-Qa’eda, is reactionary and must be condemned by socialists.

The attack was clearly well coordinated and prepared in advance. It appears to have been aimed to coincide with the G8 Summit in Scotland and then the celebrations following London winning the nomination for the 2012 Olympic Games.

Blair and Bush hypocrisy

Blair and Bush had tried to use both these events as a means of ‘rehabilitating’ themselves. However, these terrible attacks are a consequence of the policies and actions of these and other capitalist rulers and their system in Iraq, the brutal oppression of the Palestinian people by the imperialist backed Israeli state and the massive exploitation of the peoples of the neo-colonial countries.

Blair was attempting to use the ‘Make Poverty History’ campaign, the winning of the Olympic Games 2012 bid and the anniversary of the ending of World War II to ‘restore’ his position. The consequences of these events can eventually shipwreck his plans.

However, in the short term the Blair government will undoubtedly try to use these attacks to launch a campaign to win support, playing on the fears of people and try to introduce even more repressive legislation. This may have some effect temporarily in ‘rallying support’. However, this will eventually give way to even greater opposition to him and his policies.

With most of the security chiefs and security measures currently focused on the G8 summit in Gleneagles, those who carried out this attack ‘took the opportunity’ to cause maximum damage in London. Thousands of police officers from London were deployed to Edinburgh to protect the G8 leaders.

The leaders of the G8 were safely ensconced in the luxury hotel at Gleneagles when these attacks took place. Following the bombings both Bush and Blair issued hypocritical statements condemning the attacks. Bush, in his usual display of arrogance in a radio interview contrasted “what is happening in London to those who are meeting in Gleneagles to resolve the problems of poverty and Aids”.

Blair, who was visibly shaken by the bombings and the possible consequences it will have, in a statement declared that: “It is particularly barbaric that this happened on a day when people are meeting to try to help the problems of poverty in Africa and the long term problem of climate change and the environment”.

Yet all of the statements made by these leaders condemning the bombers can equally be applied to what they themselves have done in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries.

The policies these leaders have imposed on the peoples of the world have been responsible for increasing poverty wars and terrorism. They are responsible, together with the pharmaceutical companies for denying those suffering from HIV/AIDS drugs that will lengthen life expectancy.

The war in Iraq which they have waged has resulted in over 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths. It is capitalism and the drive for profits that is responsible for the destruction of the environment.

However, as in New York, Bali and Madrid it is the ordinary working people who have paid the price for the imperialist wars they have waged in Iraq and Afghanistan and the back-breaking exploitation of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Blair and other capitalist leaders will use these bombings to try and justify the introduction of further repressive legislation and attacks on democratic rights. Blair will use these bombings to try and force through the introduction of national identity cards (ID cards) and a national register which currently do not exist in Britain. This proposal was facing serious opposition and the prospect of defeat prior to the London bombings. Following these events it is now more likely to be agreed to in parliament. Whether it will be accepted by a majority of people, especially young people, is another question.

These bombings again illustrate that repression cannot remove the threat of terrorism. All of the repression by the British state against the IRA in Ireland could not defeat that organisation. In Madrid the existence of ID cards did not prevent the bombings there. The current threat of terrorist attacks by al-Qa'eda organisations arises from the consequences of the policies of the main imperialist powers in Iraq and other countries and the social catastrophe that imperialism and capitalism has caused in the neo-colonial world.

Iraq and the bombings

Blair is attempting to imply that these bombings have nothing to do with Iraq. This is not the view of the capitalist intelligence agencies. The CIA has concluded that since Iraq has been occupied it has been attracting terrorist cells like “fly paper”.

In 2003 the British Parliamentary ‘Intelligence and Security Committee disclosed that five weeks before the war Blair was warned by the Joint Intelligence Committee that: “al-Qe’ada and associated groups continue to represent by far the greatest terrorist threat to Western interests, and that the threat would be heightened by military action [in Iraq]”

Just before the US Presidential elections Bin Laden asked “Why do we not attack Sweden?”

The London bombings, like those in Madrid, Bali and New York are, in military parlance, ‘blow back’ for the imperialist interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The initial sentiment of people in Britain at the moment is one of shock. Many feel stunned by what has taken place. The first reaction of many people will be a tendency to ‘rally together’. This may temporarily strengthen Blair’s position.

However, this can later turn to anger and even greater opposition to Blair who will eventually be held responsible for putting the London population ‘in the line of fire’. In Spain the government’s initial attempt to blame the Basque nationalist group ETA enraged people. Blair has not repeated this mistake of Aznar. However, he will be held responsible by many people because of his support for the war in Iraq.

There is a danger of a racist backlash in Britain aimed against the Muslim population and other ethnic minorities. The day following the bombings the Muslim Council of Britain reported that 30,000 threatening e/mails have been received by Muslim organisations. This threat must be fought against It is essential to fight for the unity of all working people to oppose any attempt to scapegoat the Muslim population or other ethnic minorities. At the same time other incidents have been reported of acts of solidarity to try and prevent racist attacks. On the day of the bombings in London’s Leather Lane street market white market stall traders visited Asia snack bars to check they had suffered no abuse and offered their assistance in the event of any racist recriminations.

Socialist alternative

The Socialist Party is campaigning for the unity of all working people in London. Demonstrations need to be organised demanding unity of all working people. Such protests should be called to oppose terrorism, imperialist wars and those who perpetrate them and the introduction of repressive legislation.

These bombings show the need to struggle to build a socialist alternative of all working people to Blair and Bush and the system they defend. They and their system are ultimately responsible for such horrific attacks.

It is urgent to fight to build a mass socialist alternative of all working people that will oppose terrorism, imperialist wars and fight Blair, Bush and their capitalist system and struggle for a socialist world. The only way to make war, terrorism and poverty history is to build a socialist world.

No to terrorism and imperialist wars

Withdrawal of British US and all imperialist troops from Iraq and the Middle East For the unity in struggle of the Iraqi peoples and a workers’ and peasants socialist government No to racism for unity of working people Defend democratic rights and civil liberties Down with the G8 and cancel the debt Build a socialist alternative to capitalism and imperialism

by eeekkk Fri Jul 08, 2005 18:23

.

by International Action Center-Boston Sat Jul 09, 2005 02:07

IAC statement extends sympathy and condolences, but reminds us of ALL the casualities of war.
********************************************
Statement of the International Action Center on the July 7 Bombings in
London
********************************************

While the people of London and worldwide were grieving for those who
were slain and injured, and as the International Action Center
extends heartfelt sympathy and condolences to all who have lost loved
ones in today's bombings in London, the Bush Administration has
wasted no time in taking advantage of tragedy to once again advance
its own agenda of endless war and colonial occupation.

The news is not that bombs killed more than 40 people today; it is
that those people live in London rather than Basra. The U.S. and
British occupation of Iraq causes the death of an average of 20
people a day, every day. Bush and Blair do not stop their meetings to
grieve over these deaths, nor do the news channels stop everything to
give round the clock updates on these casualties because the victims
of these crimes are Iraqi civilians and their deaths are considered
unimportant by the corporate-owned media and politicians.

In his response to the events in London today, Bush declared,"the
war on terror goes on," signalling that he will cynically use this
tragedy to justify the continued occupation of Iraq, an occupation
that brings death, destruction, and torture to the people of Iraq on
a daily basis.

Bush and Blair claim to be fighting terror, but everything they have
said so far has been a lie. The truth is that their illegal war and
the ongoing occupations of Iraq, Palestine, Haiti, and Afghanistan
are themselves acts of terror.

We cannot allow George W. Bush to manipulate genuine feelings of
grief and anguish to justify a violent occupation of Iraq, which has
left families grieving for 100,000 dead, many more injured, and
thousands imprisoned and tortured. The incident today cannot be used
to rain greater destruction on the people of Baghdad, Najaf, and Gaza.

The Bush Administration raised the terror alert to orange and Bush
said that he had been in contact with the Department of Homeland
Security and other police and security forces, instructing them to be
"extra vigilant."

We know from the past several years what this "vigilance"
has meant to Arab and Muslim communities--mass roundups and
detentions, deportations, disappearances, and rendition. We must be
vigilant and take action to stop the Administration from using
today's tragedy to perpetrate more harassment, violence, and abuse on
Arab and Muslim people.

We do not know who was behind the events today. We do know that as
hundreds of thousands of people were gathered to protest the G-8
policies of corporate global plunder, Bush and Blair are exploiting
today's tragedy to advance their agenda of global domination. We know
that we must continue to do everything in our power to oppose that
agenda.

The only way to respond to today's bombing is to extend condolences
to the families of those who perished or were injured; build
solidarity with people around the world struggling against war,
racism, and colonial occupation; to stand in solidarity with Arab and
Muslim communities who have been targeted by the Bush Administration;
and to continue building the movement to stop the oppression that
inevitably brings resistance.
*******************************************
International Action Center - Boston
617-522-6626
iacboston@iacboston.org
http://www.iacboston.org
http://www.iacenter.org

by Jason Brannigan - Organise! Sat Jul 09, 2005 18:30 organiseireland at yahoo dot ie

Organise! and the Just Books collective in Belfast are also signatories to this statement. Putting it out was suggested by an Organise! member on libcom. Could someone correct the list of signatories and maybe change the title to 'British and Irish' anarchists?

In solidarity;

Jason Brannigan
Organise!

by redjade Sat Jul 09, 2005 18:44

"Letter to the Editor"
Irish Independent, 07/07/05

Sir,

They come under various banners. Some call themselves 'anarchists', others 'communists'. Some say they are 'revolutionaries'. Their purpose is the same: the destruction of the G8 meeting. And amid the black flags, the masked faces, the inevitable firebombs, damaged shop-fronts and vandalised streets, it's time that more people came to understand what these violent 'protestors' actually represent: an all-out attack on Western civilisation, the 21st century equivalent of the barbarians who besieged Rome.

One can only hope that the Scottish authorities will appreciate this, and deal with their 'demonstration' accordingly.

Yours,

Graham N*

republished at
http://www.geocities.com/graham_neary/

by .:. iosaf ·.· the ipsiphi Sat Jul 09, 2005 22:13

-this is not about politics
-we ought not have to say we condemn,
we should not have to say we do not support it,
that ought be taken for granted, We really ought only for the dignity of the dead and wounded and the true meaning of compassion with all londoners simply say we sympathise.

Yet from all corners and sides of the political and cultural backgrounds of Europe we feel we have to use the word "condemn".

= that it is part of the underlying problem. What is it we condemn and how are we qualified to condemn it?

all londoners are victims. She is sympathising. But what would she condemn? = listen to her.

by SF watch Sun Jul 10, 2005 17:50

I note that Gerry Adam's quote does not condmen the attacks. The attacks are completely reactionary and counter productive, it will only strengthen the hand of Blair in repressing civil rights. Do SF oppose the bombing of civilian targets like this? Do they condemn it? I doubt they will because SF/IRA have launched attacks like this on ordinary london, birmingham and liverpool people in the past. They support this kind of tactic and still dont rule out returning to it!

by Mark P - Socialist Party (personal cap) Sun Jul 10, 2005 18:02

Actually SF Watch, the Sinn Fein statement does condemn the bombings. You can follow the link from the main article above.

by Dublin republican Sun Jul 10, 2005 18:44

http://b4.boards2go.com/boards/board.cgi?action=read&id=1121016373&user=32csm

some interesting points raised .

by redjade Sun Jul 10, 2005 18:59

G8 Update July 10, 2005 Actions and Aftermaths

(These updates are written by Starhawk as an account of the anti-G8 protests in Scotland.)

[....]

I’m finding lots of emails asking how we are after the London bombings. The news reached us in the middle of Thursday morning’s meeting, while we were thinking about the impact of Wednesday’s actions and trying to plan a response to the police line which arrived at 2:30 AM the night before and blocked us in. Many of us had had little sleep for two nights, and that added to the surreal horror of the news. Many people in camp came from London and almost all have friends or family there, so naturally people were afraid and worried. I saw some tears, much agitation. We took a break to meet in our barrios, our neighborhoods, to decide what to do. When we came back, we agreed that it was not a day for heavy confrontation or to try to push out through police lines—should one be inclined to that sort of thing.

[....]

A small group went off to try and write a statement from the camp, or at least from such barrios as might agree to sign on to it. They apparently failed, and the reasons why bear thinking about but that will have to wait until I have time to write a more reflective piece, The short answer is that while everyone in camp was anguished and horrified by the deaths in London, many also felt that they should not be set above the ongoing, everyday deaths and violence that we were there to protest against—the deaths from poverty, from lack of access to clean water and food, from the far greater state terrorism of war. And that’s a tricky piece of writing to be done by a stressed group of people. Those of us on the facilitation team who might have smoothed the process were busy elsewhere, and it bogged down.

Personally, I was saddened and sick at heart. I’m here protesting the G8 because I’m against the killing of innocent victims for political goals. Hell, I’m even against the killing of guilty victims. I just want to see us evolve beyond the stage where we think that killing people is a good solution to problems of any kind. I also don’t much like hypocrisy—which the G8 leaders and process exemplify. I believe the London bombers have committed wrong and immoral acts, and should be prevented from doing more of the same and brought to justice. But I don’t see some great moral divide between them and the G8 leaders such as Bush and Blair, who are also willing to murder the innocent in order to achieve their political and personal goals. I would like to see them also brought to justice for the hundreds of thousands of lives lost in Iraq alone. I would like to see them prevented from killing again. I especially dislike the hypocrisy that accords them all the power, respect and resources of the state to back their violence. That’s why I come to these things, to protest, to make visible the inherent violence in the system, to demonstrate a different possibility. And yet when people are in shock and grief, when the violence of a violent system hits close to home, they don’t need political analysis or larger perspectives—just expressions of shared sorrow and compassion. And I wish we had been able to somehow do this.

more...
http://www.starhawk.org

by saoirse as corcaigh Sun Jul 10, 2005 23:36

It's worth recalling what was said after September 2001. A rearward glance shows that before the war against the Taliban and long before the war against Saddam Hussein, there were many who had determined that 'we had it coming'. They had to convince themselves that Islamism was a Western creation: an understandable reaction to the International Monetary Fund or hanging chads in Florida or whatever else was agitating them, rather than an autonomous psychopathic force with reasons of its own. In the years since, this manic masochism has spread like bindweed and strangled leftish and much conservative thought.

All kinds of hypocrisy remained unchallenged. In liberal London and Dublin, social success at the dinner table belonged to the man who could at the same time maintain that we've got it coming but that nothing was going to come; that arbitrary murder would be Tony Blair's fault but there wouldn't be indiscriminate murder because 'the threat' was a phantom menace invented by Blair to scare the cowed electorate into supporting him.

I'd say the 'power of nightmares' side of that oxymoronic argument is too bloodied to be worth discussing this weekend and it's better to stick with the wider delusion.

On Thursday, before the police had made one arrest, before one terrorist group had claimed responsibility, before one sick posting had been made on Indymedia.ie, before one body had been carried from the wreckage, let alone been identified and allowed to rest in peace, the same old liberal dinner party voices voices filled with righteousness were proclaiming that the real murderers weren't the real murderers but the Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair.

At no point do such idiots grasp that Islamism was a reactionary movement as great as fascism, which had claimed millions of mainly Muslim lives in the Sudan, Iran, Algeria and Afghanistan and is claiming thousands in Iraq. As with fascism, it takes a resolute gobshite and ignoramus, or closet Nazi, to put all the responsibility on democratic governments for its existence.

It's a narrow-minded line of reasoning to suppose that all bad, or all good, comes from the West - and a racist one to boot. The unavoidable consequence is that you must refuse to support democrats, liberals, feminists and socialists in the Arab world and Iran who are the victims of Islamism in its Sunni and Shia guises because you are too compromised to condemn their persecutors.


Whether you are brown or white, Muslim, Christian, Jew or atheist, it is uncomfortable to face the fact that there is a messianic cult of death called Islamism, which, like European fascism and communism before it, will send you to your grave whatever you do. But I'm afraid that's what the record shows.

The only plausible excuse for 11 September was that it was a protest against America's relationship with Israel. Unfortunately, Osama bin Laden's statements revealed that he was obsessed with the American troops defending Saudi Arabia from Saddam Hussein and had barely said a word about Palestine.

After the Bali bombings, the conventional wisdom was that the Australians had been blown to pieces as a punishment for their government's support for Bush. No one thought for a moment about the Australian forces which stopped Indonesian militias rampaging through East Timor, a small country Indonesia had invaded in 1975 with the backing of the US. Yet when bin Laden spoke, he said it was Australia's anti-imperialist intervention to free a largely Catholic population from a largely Muslim occupying power which had bugged him.

East Timor was a great cause of the left until the Australians made it an embarrassment. So, too, was the suffering of the victims of Saddam, until the tyrant made the mistake of invading Kuwait and becoming America's enemy. In the past two years in Iraq, UN and Red Cross workers have been massacred, trade unionists assassinated, school children and aid workers kidnapped and decapitated and countless people who happened to be on the wrong bus or on the wrong street at the wrong time paid for their mistake with their lives.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawitold bin Laden that the northern Kurds may be Sunni but 'Islam's voice has died out among them' and they'd been infiltrated by Jews. The southern Shia were 'a sect of treachery' while any Arab, Kurd, Shia or Sunni who believed in a democratic Iraq was a heretic.

When Abu Bakr Bashir was arrested for the Bali bombings, he was asked how the families of the dead could avoid the fate of their relatives. 'Please convert to Islam,' he replied. But as the past 40 years have shown, Islamism is mainly concerned with killing and oppressing Muslims.

In his intervention before last year's American presidential election, bin Laden praised Robert Fisk, whose journalism he admired. 'I consider him to be neutral,' he said, so I suppose we could all resolve not to take the tube unless we can sit next to Mr Fisk. But as the killings are indiscriminate, I can't see how that would help and, in any case, who wants to be stuck on a train with an Independent reporter?

There are many tasks in the coming days. Staying calm, helping the police and protecting Muslim communities from neo-Nazi attack are high among them. But the greatest is to resolve to see the world for what it is and remove the twin vices of wilful myopia and bad faith like that which we have seen in Indymedia, which have disfigured too much liberal thought for too long.

by John Meehan Mon Jul 11, 2005 23:47

Denounce the London Bombings -
and Remember that the violence of Blair's Government in iraq is much worse

Baghdad comes to London

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/633/633p15.htm

Julian Coppens, London

Riding the number 30 bus to the British Socialist Workers Party's annual
Marxism conference today, the day after a bus on that route was
attacked, I caught a tiny glimpse of the terror in terrorism. When I
went upstairs to sit down as usual, it was empty. As we came into Kings
Cross, a jam of red buses were trying to get past scores of TV crews and
journalists, kitted out with lights and umbrellas. I noticed there were
only a few people on the top decks of all the buses. We glanced at each
other with blank faces and watched the movements of fellow passengers
who came up the stairs.

As we moved on to Euston, and the entrance to Tavistock Place, there
were more TV crews and white plastic sheets covering the view of the
destroyed bus. Dried human flesh and blood were still smeared over the
walls of the British Medical Association. My mother called me while I
was on the bus to check again that I was OK. I didn’t tell her which bus
route I was on.

Two weeks earlier, in my English language beginners' class for refugees,
a middle-aged Iraqi student answered her mobile phone. She lives alone
in a bed-and-breakfast near Kings Cross. Her husband is dead, killed by
Saddam, and her five children live in Baghdad. For the last two years,
she has been unsuccessfully trying to get permission from the Home
Office for her children to join her in London. When she finished
speaking on the phone, she returned to the class in tears. It was her
daughter telling her a bomb had gone off that morning in the market in
Baghdad -- 30 dead so far. She was distraught.

Today the first 10-15 pages of every newspaper are devoted to the
bombings in London. Unless Western soldiers or contractors are involved,
the bombs in Baghdad only get a few paragraphs in the middle. Now, the
papers are full of eyewitness accounts: dozens of near-miss testimonies
-- ``lucky I had two coffees instead of my usual one''; minute-by-minute
accounts from survivors; the tragedy of the dead and their loved ones;
the flowers and the memorials; and the stoic Londoners getting on with
business. We will be watching and reading all about it for weeks, in
London and around the world, thanks to all those TV cameras filming the
tube station entrances and the white plastic sheets.

But, as Respect MP George Galloway said on TV last night, what about the
dead in Baghdad and Fallujah? In Mosul, Basra and Tikrit? In
Afghanistan? In the refugee camps of the Gaza strip and the West Bank?
When the bombs fall from 10 kilometres in the air, so high you can’t
even hear the planes, and kill thousands, or they rip through busy
streets and market places in Baghdad, we don’t hear their stories of
near escapes, chance decisions or the tragedy and sorrow of their
families. We don’t see the blurry images from mobile phones.

In Baghdad, do they stare out the window of the bus wondering if or when
another explosion will bring death to the city? Do they keep away from
that bus route, street or market stall for a few days? Or do they lie in
bed desperately trying to hear the almost imperceptible rumble of a B-52
miles above? Do the authorities erect white plastic sheets to hide the
body parts?

When our governments bomb them, do they have hundreds of ambulances,
fire engines and police bringing out the wounded and rushing them to
hospital, all within 20 minutes? Or do they just bleed to death on the
pavement? When we bomb them does it matter if they die?

Our bombers have expensive planes and millions of dollars of training,
nice uniforms and the advice of expensive lawyers. They are sanctioned
by ``democratically elected'' governments.

So now, to paraphrase the Queen Mother, we Londoners can look the people
of Baghdad in the eye. But is it really the same?


Stop all the terror! Troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan

http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2005/633/633p24.htm

Alison Dellit

On July 7, some of the horrific consequences of the ``war on terror''
hit working-class Londoners. In a series of bomb blasts on the London
tube and buses, more than 50 people were killed, and more than 700
injured, many losing limbs or suffering other debilitating injuries.

This was the third major terrorist attack targeting citizens whose
governments compose the ``coalition of the willing'' since the invasion
of Iraq: following the 2002 Bali bombing; and the 2004 bombings in
Spain. As in those cases, the incessant media coverage of the suffering
inflicted upon innocents -- those who have never bombed or shot or
starved a nation -- has brought home to First World residents just how
awful political violence against civilians is.

And at the same time, there are the attempts to use this to further the
war on the Third World. We have already been treated to pronouncements
by British PM Tony Blair, US President George Bush and Australian PM
John Howard, that these terrorists are targeting ``civilisation'', ``our
values'' and that great standby,``our way of life''.

But this approach is deliberately misleading. Robert Fisk said it best
in the Independent on July 8: ``It's no use Blair telling us, `They will
never succeed in destroying what we hold dear'. They are not trying to
destroy `what we hold dear'. They are trying to get public opinion to
force Blair to withdraw from Iraq, out of his alliance with the United
States, out of his adherence to Bush's policies in the Middle East.”

A similar line is being pushed by Australian politicians, from PM John
Howard to Labor Party leader Kim Beazley, who are all scrambling to get
their sad-looking mugs on television.

Amid all the rhetoric about the terrorists wanting to ``make us more
afraid'' is an attempt to portray the attacks as some kind of clash of
cultures. As if the culture of violence is not promoted by Bush, Blair
and Howard. As if their wars on Iraq and Afghanistan do not kill working
people, or maim and terrorise their children.

The terrorists are certainly brutal and murderous, and we at Green Left
Weekly condemn their acts, as people have worldwide. But such ``evil''
does not come from nowhere. It certainly does not come from Islam, or
from being Middle Eastern, and it does not come from poverty either,
despite Blair's claims.

It comes from the systematic and incredibly brutal violence that is
currently being inflicted on the people of Iraq, of Afghanistan, of
Palestine and elsewhere.

This violence is not separate from the economic terrorism of the
neoliberal policies that are rammed down the throats of poor
governments, pushing unemployment up and destroying social services,
while trade rules remain stacked against the Third World. The iron grip
that the imperialists use to support their mega-corporations' profits is
maintained by the threat of real, military terror. It is enforced by the
constant threat that those who do not play ball will end up like Saddam
Hussein; and their people will end up like the Iraqis.

We do not get 24-hour newsfeeds from Iraq. The 100,000 people that the
British-US-Australian invasion wiped from the face of the earth will not
get their mugshots in any First World newspaper. There will be no
star-studded fundraiser to help their families deal with the grief and
loss. The Iraqi victims of the ``war on terror'' have become a
statistic; the scale of individuals' loss too terrible to grasp.

The Afghan victims of Bush's war are even less visible to us.
``Liberated'' Afghanistan is run by warlords, has an economy dominated
by opium production, and is policed by US troops that have been found,
repeatedly, to use torture and brutality. It is not a good place to be
female, or vulnerable. Becoming somewhat of an embarrassment to the US,
Afghanistan has quietly vanished from our television screens and
newspapers.

In the aftermath of the attacks in London, we can expect a new
``security offensive''. Already, police in the US have been patrolling
trains with machine guns (which are so much more useful against timer
bombs than regular hand guns). In Australia, there have been calls for
tighter security on trains.

But there is no military solution to fighting al Qaeda-style terrorism,
which relies on a relatively small group of people willing to risk
everything to cause maximum damage. More terror laws, ID cards, armed
police and even cops on trains will do nothing more than enable the
state to harass Arabs and Muslims further.

There is only a political solution to ending the violence, and that is
to actually end the violence. End the occupation of Iraq. End the
occupation of Afghanistan. Stop support for Israel’s Apartheid-style
regime that is slaughtering Palestinians. How can Bush and Blair condemn
terrorism when they use terror to kill democracy? When they use terror
to destroy left-wing movements that might mobilise effective dissent,
and thus reduce support for the right-wing fanatics? When they occupy a
country and drive its youth into a guerrilla war?

Of course, most Londoners know this. That is why they have protested in
their hundreds of thousands against the war on Iraq. That is why Blair
may go down in history as the most widely loathed British prime minister
(and in a country that produced Margaret Thatcher, that’s quite a feat).

The London bombers did not target war criminals. Quite the opposite --
Edgeware Road is, in fact, in one of the most highly Arab-populated
areas of London. Aldgate Station borders on Bethnal Green & Bow, whose
constituents just months ago threw out the pro-war Labour Party to elect
the anti-war RESPECT candidate George Galloway. It is not far from
London’s largest mosque.

Those who were killed in London have become the latest victims of the
``war on terror''. There has been enough killing: it is time we renewed
our efforts to stop it, by fighting our governments' war agenda, and by
supporting those offering legitimate, constructive resistance in the
Third World. This includes the Iraqi resistance -- whose soldiers are
fighting to free their country -- who must not be tarred with the same
brush as the right-wing murderous, and ultimately counterproductive,
terrorists. We must focus on where the violence is really coming from.

There has never been a better time to stop a war.

From Green Left Weekly, July 13, 2005.

by Graham Sun Jul 17, 2005 20:55

I was trying to figure out where all those Indymedia hits were coming from, now I see. Thanks man!

Graham

by Badman Sun Jul 17, 2005 21:11

I might as well inquire about the paranoid fantasies. Barbarians seeking the destruction of western civilization? Bwaaahahhahhaha. No evidence, nothing but your own fantasy world. Do these barbarians eat babies?

by Graham Sun Jul 17, 2005 22:30

I didn't hear any baby-eating stories, just the expected vandalism, rioting, conspiracy and general unrestrained destruction of both public and private property in the area. Pretty much exactly what you'd expect from a protest against civilisation, dont'ya think?

by redjade Mon Jul 18, 2005 00:42

In the hours after the bombings in London, the backlash began.
Innocent people, as in the bombings, were targeted
in what appear to be racially motivated attacks.
http://www.irr.org.uk/2005/july/ak000008.html

by not hoodwinked Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:26

This article in the URL below further raises the suspicions around the London bombings and it's benefit for the elites agenda.

"We received an e mail from an employee of Stagecoach, the company responsible for the majority of London buses.

Our contact works a route roughly one mile from the site of the bus bombing last Thursday.

The bus driver pointed out that the number 30 bus was the only one to be re-routed after the initial bombs went off in the London Underground, every other bus carried on its normal journey, but for some reason this bus was diverted.

.......

Well, it's a grainy picture of a Muslim guy with a rucksack, case closed! That's good enough evidence for me, I'm going back to sleep.

It's beyond doubt that these four Muslims were framed. They were most likely hired as MI6 spies, sent to Pakistan and then brought back and told they were to take part in an important exercise to test national security. Give them the rucksacks, get them on the trains and then detonate the bombs remotely.

Do you really believe for a second that guys with 8 month babies and guys who taught diasbled schoolchildren would want to blow themselves up and kill other innocent people?"

As someone commented on a mailing list recently regarding this story:

> This makes sense ONLY if they thought they were carrying fake bombs as part of a terror drill. This also explains the nervousness of the man on the bus who had probably just heard of the real explosions and was starting to suspect that the fake bomb he was carrying might not be fake after all.
>
> "Hey you, Muslim person. Wanna make a hundred pounds? You could use that kind of dough, with a new kid and all. We're running a terror drill, and all you gotta do is take this here harmless backpack with a fake bomb inside to work with you tomorrow, just to see if the subway guards catch you or not. Mum's the word, this is national security and all; you can't tell anyone!"

by ex-Pioneer Tue Jul 19, 2005 13:38

new graffiti found in Dublin city centre today

by hmmmmmmm - iosaf Tue Jul 19, 2005 13:55

* Why would a Jamaican convert to Islam?
Weren't the windrush generation so special because like their english hosts, they played cricket and worshipped an anglican God with religious fervour?

* And as the British ( & Irish chums) wonder at their previously enviable multi-culturalism all attention goes to Pakistan, to the third generation pakistanis, british kids who comitted suicide and murder at the same time. At what generational stage does a "british pakistani" become English? Why is that these boys from Leeds are "british" but not "english"?

*How long shall it take for England to breed her own *english* suicide bombers?

*If they had detonated weapons with radioactive material, chemical material or bacteria would there still be no officially admitted link with Iraq?

*why is that the 17year old girl from Ireland killed in Turkey is an "irish victim" for some , "victim number 3" for certain other media, yet victims number 1 and 2 were unclaimed by the Irish media in general? Were they "less Irish" because they were working in Iraq?

by news of the world Tue Jul 19, 2005 14:24

all religon sucks

by Duke Lane Tue Jul 19, 2005 14:36

Hi,

The bombings in London have brought home the reality of what is happening in Iraq. The politics, goals, and methods of the Insurgents in Iraq are the same as those of the London bombers.

Their goals are the replacement of democracy with religious dictatorship. Their "politics" are a form of extreme Islamic beliefs. Their methods are mass murder of innocent civilians by way of suicide bombing.

Ordinary British people are now victims of the same type of attacks from the same enemy as ordinary Iraqi people, (albeit in a far less intensive way so far).

People who are sympathetic, or mildly supportive or ambivalent about the Iraqi insurgents need to review their positions.

If you are against the London bombers you logically should be against the insurgents in Iraq.

If you are pro the insurgents then you are logically pro the London bombers.

It follows therefore that calls to pull out of Iraq are exactly the wrong thing to do at this point. Apart from being morally bankrupt, to do so is to abandon the Iraqis to a gruesome fate, and to invest in a future of increased terror attacks in Europe.

The time for fence sitting is over.

by By Any Means Necessary Tue Jul 19, 2005 14:44

The insurgents in iraq may now be religously motivated and stirring up religous division between sunni and shia , however their presence and strength in this country is due solely to the invaison.