Bloggerheads

Guardian – IRA orders end to armed campaign

BBC – How the IRA has reached this step

You don’t need to tell *me* how we got here… I know.

This only happened because we decided on the brave and intelligent step of invading Norway in response to the atrocities.

Note – Anything to do with Ireland, check Slugger O’Toole

There’s work to be sorted and planning to do for the exclusion zone protest next Monday August 1st.

If you’re new here, you can follow my concerns about the exclusion zone and the issues that surround it by clicking here or poking your way around this category.

I’ll be working on some posters… suggestions for slogans or themes are welcome.

Additionally, I urge you to promote this protest on your weblog and explain its importance to your readers.

(Incidentally, you may not know that laws passed to target animal rights activists already make it illegal to protest outside Downing St. Which is a residence. This new ‘exclusion zone’ law is supposedly designed to target… organised crime.)

Oh, FFS…

First we were assured that Iraq played no part in the London bombings because 11/9 happened before Iraq and the roots went so deep that it obviously didn’t matter how much water we fed them – or that we allowed terrorists to take root in Iraq. Therefore, we should abandon this line of thinking.

Then Iraq was a factor, but it was inferred heavily that anyone who mentioned this was actually suggesting that we ‘give in’ to the terrorists. Therefore, we should abandon this line of thinking.

Now Blair denies the denial, and assures us that anyone not holding his position on terror seeks to justify the actions of terrorists. (Which – we can assume – would be a far worse crime than using terrorists to justify an illegal invasion, torture of men, women and children, use of napalm on civilians, etc. etc. etc.)

Therefore… oh, hell, you know the rest.

Tony Blair (26 July): My point to you is this – it’s time we stopped saying ‘OK, we abhor their methods but we kinda see something in their ideas or maybe they’ve got a sliver of excuse or justification’. They’ve got no justification for it…

Why, even the Isareli Foreign Minister agrees…

Silvan Shalom (26 July): There is no room for tolerance or understanding of the motives and justifications of these suicide bombers whether they live in London, or Sharm El-Sheik, or Tel Aviv, New York or Madrid. Nothing justifies the action of the taking of innocent lives.

Lovely logic. Don’t consider the motives, because nothing can justify the action.

You may want to check out this post at Perfect and the following three articles:

The Herald – Should Blair step down?: One danger in the present situation is that, in an effort to present a united front to the terrorists, the public loses its capacity for critical debate. It was absurd for Mr Blair to insist that linking the July 7 bombings and the Iraq war was tantamount to offering succour to terrorists. By doing so, he confused reason with justification, of which there is none in either London or Baghdad. Yesterday, he was prepared to retreat only slightly from his original position, admitting the conflict might affect the warped thinking of a small minority. That is the nub of it. We cannot undo the invasion of Iraq, however mistaken, so now the focus must be on tracking down and incapacitating that small minority. It is vital that, in the heat of this battle, the government does not rush through measures that could prove both counter-productive and destructive of hard-won civil liberties.

Guardian – The 5 per cent solution: The best current example of this is his support for the police call for the power of 14-days detention for questioning of terrorist suspects to be extended to three months – temporary internment by any other name. But Mr Blair also made clear yesterday that he wants to revisit the issue of indefinite detention of foreign suspects – on which the law lords ruled against the government last year. Both are bad calls both legally and politically; Mr Blair should think again. Presumably he thinks that because they play well in the tabloids the calls are worth making.

The Scum Says – Gloves Off: Britain is fighting al-Qaeda with one arm tied behind its back. In times of war, normal rules don’t apply. The bombers of 7/7 and 21/7 don’t live by any rules, or even the warped moral code the IRA used to justify its murders. We can’t stoop to the terrorists’ level, of course. But it IS time for the human rights laws which weaken us at every turn to be put on the back burner. Tony Blair wants to cage suspects for up to 90 days without trial. Good. He wants new laws, including the banning of extremist clerics, to destroy the evil at its roots. Good. But he’ll get nowhere if Britain’s judges back the suspects’ rights over our right to defend our country by whatever means. If they do it’ll be the fault, yet again, of the ridiculous and dangerous Human Rights Act that ironically the PM signed up to. It has no place in our society at a time like this. It’s time it was scrapped.

UPDATES:

A Big Stick and a Small Carrot – Pandering to the Terrorist Menace: What we need to do is isolate the extremists, whose number are still small, from their potential recruiting grounds. This takes far more courage than anything Blair has shown. It is not easy but it is the only way to win this “war”. We do not help our cause when we invade Iraq, change our minds about why we did it after we’d done it, and then make a spectacularly bad job of the occupation. In this way, and others, we have lent credence to the extremists rhetoric and driven large numbers of new recruits into their open arms. Blair can never win this “war”. He’s fighting it in the wrong place. (Link via Europhobia. Another hat-tip goes to Toby.)

(Note – A massive hat-tip goes to Gnus Of The World, who came up with the original concept.)

ICIGSITBOTH – In Case I Get Shot In The Back Of The Head

Eight out of ten people aren’t carrying information that would help if they were accidentally or mistakenly shot in the back of the head. Storing next-of-kin details in your mobile phone can assist the emergency services if you’re unable to tell them who to contact because your brains are spilled all over a railway platform.

How does it work?

Simply use your mobile’s phone book to store the name and number of someone who should be contacted if you happen to be shot in the back of the head – but add the letters ICIGSITBOTH in front of their name.

ICIGSITBOTH stands for “In Case I Get Shot In The Back Of The Head”: it’s what the emergency services will look for if you’re somewhat dark in colour, happen to be wearing a heavy jacket on a sunny day and/or fail to stop when plain-clothed men holding automatic weapons chase you down the street. This incredibly straightforward idea was developed by the Gnus Of The World and is supported by Bloggerheads.

Getting started

On most mobile phones you simply need to select “Contacts” and choose “Add New Contact”, then enter the letters “ICIGSITBOTH” next to the name, followed by the telephone number of your next of kin. Make sure you choose a number that’s easy to get in touch with – and please make sure that you choose a friend or family member with a good imagination and strong stomach, as they will no doubt be called upon to identify you at the morgue.

What should I do next?

Make sure the person whose name and number you are giving has agreed to be your “ICIGSITBOTH partner”. You should also make sure your ICIGSITBOTH partner has a list of people to contact on your behalf, such as your place of work (as you probably won’t be in on Monday). In addition, they’ll need to know about any medical conditions that could complicate your condition, including allergies, medication or the absence of titanium plates in your skull.

If you’re under 18, your ICIGSITBOTH partner should be your mother, your father or an immediate member of your family authorised to make decisions on your behalf when you are no longer able to think for yourself due to a sudden interruption in brain function.

If you wish, you can also store details of your immigration status in your mobile phone and direct that these be forwarded to Richard Littlejohn so he can stick the boot in a few days after your unfortunate departure. After all, you have to be guilty of *something*…

Storing an ICIGSITBOTH number makes it easier for everyone if you’re involved in getting shot in the back of the head. It only takes a few seconds, so do it today – please.

Please note that this initiative is in no way linked to any of the following equally worthwhile initiatives:

ICIFTSFEWAAC – In Case I Fail To Stop Fast Enough When Approaching A Checkpoint

ICITWTM – In Case I’m Too Weak To Move

ICIGWOBN – In Case I Get Wiped Out By Napalm

ICIHTDWMG – In Case I Happen To Disagree With My Government

YBMUYB – You Blew Me Up You Bastard

ICTBCOMBTCTMHG – In Case Tony Blair Crawls Over My Body To Claim The Moral High Ground

UPDATE – Just in case you haven’t seen it yet.

Tony Blair: This is the battle that must be won, a battle not just about the terrorist methods but their views. Not just their barbaric acts, but their barbaric ideas. Not only what they do but what they think and the thinking they would impose on others… Neither is it true that they have no demands. They do. It is just that no sane person would negotiate on them… They demand the elimination of Israel; the withdrawal of all Westerners from Muslim countries, irrespective of the wishes of people and government; the establishment of effectively Taleban states and Sharia law in the Arab world en route to one caliphate of all Muslim nations… This is a religious ideology… Those who kill in its name believe genuinely that in doing it, they do God’s work; they go to paradise.

What, I wonder, is Blair’s view of the religious extremists who hold sway over the Bush administration? They have equally extreme views on the individual rights of others (and on the state of Israel, as it happens) that are closely tied to their own belief in their eventual delivery to paradise. Take their approach to abortion and abstinence as two clear examples of the willingness to kill and the imposition of their thinking on others.

Are we not going to negotiate with the Bush administration any more? Or are we perhaps going to urge the Christian community to ‘clean up their own back yard‘?

Guardian – Denunciation doesn’t work: The argument of post-Brighton Blair and his supporters is that the bombers are simply evil and any attempt to understand them in a different context leads us to conclusions that reward terrorism and thus encourage further violence.

Talk Politics – Prejudice without a Halo: You cannot defeat terrorism through ignorance of its drives, motives and objectives, by dehumanising the terrorist and turning them into a bogeyman, or by denying even the possibility, let alone reality, that own actions have, in a multiplicity of ways, contributed to and, in some instances, created the context in which terrorism exists.

A Little Bit Left – Still Winning That War On Terror: So, where are all of the apologists for this war on terror? How do you continue to say that what is being done is the right way to do it? What will it take for you to admit that this has been a colossal failure?

BBC – Shot man not connected to bombing
Guardian – Short walk and the No2 bus – a very ordinary journey to death
Perfect – They shot the wrong guy
Perfect – They shot the wrong guy (redux)
Europhobia – UK race relations improve no end…

Why did he run?

My best guess is that he ran because he was the wrong colour and he knew it. I’m reminded of the woefully incomplete report of a man silly enough to run away from an explosion last week: “Suddenly, I saw a guy coming from the stairs. He was running and at the same time people were running after him. I wanted to catch him but I was carrying heavy bags. The guy said something like ‘what’s wrong with these people’. He was a skinny Asian guy, with a little beard. He was about 19.

Why was he allowed to board and ride a bus?

We can only assume that the bus was empty. Why else would officers find it acceptable to allow him to board and ride a bus when boarding a train calls for 5 bullets to the head? Perhaps the bus was only partially full, in which case they were simply playing the numbers. 5 passengers (and a varying number of bystanders)? Acceptable losses. 50 passengers? Target the brain.

Why is it so important that he’s not at all connected to any terrorist group?

For many people, this was the clincher that prompted outrage. Jean Charles de Menezes was not connected to terrorists in any way, therefore the shooting was wrong (or perhaps merely unfortunate). But how would it be OK if he had been connected to a terrorist cell? The police suspected he was connected to terrorists and further suspected that he had a bomb. Perhaps acting on this suspicion in such a way is fair enough given the circumstances, that’s not the point I’m arguing. Had they acted in this way and found that there was no bomb, but the man was directly connected to the attacks of the 7th or 21st of July, that would still make this far from OK. Unless we’re holding public executions without trial these days and no-one has told us.

Why wasn’t the public informed of the ‘shoot to kill’ policy?

Perhaps they thought it would be less distressing for us to find out about it this way.

Who’s to blame?

The message we’re being sold at the moment is that an anti-terrorist officer pulled the trigger, but the terrorists are really to blame for creating the conditions that contributed to the event. But if you dared to suggest last week that Tony Blair created conditions that contributed to the events of the 7th or 21st of July, you were constantly reminded that he didn’t actually pull the trigger.

Maybe The Sun can explain things to me. In the scant coverage they afford this today, they helpfully explain that we can expect more people to be shot as part of the ‘shoot to kill… to protect‘ policy (ah, we’re getting closer) and a further article that doesn’t appear online points out that;

The harsh reality of life in London, July 2005, is we are at war – and a war like no other that this country has ever had to fight. But the one thing this war does have in common with others is that nasty cliche “collateral damage”. That means innocent people die. But to quote another cliche, they are dying so the rest of us can live.”

Now there’s a comforting thought… but you’ll pardon me for failing to hang onto it if my brains happen to spill out onto a railway platform.

It appears that we have the right not to get blown up, but to protect that right we have to surrender a few civil liberties… like the right not to get shot 5 times in the back of the head.

UPDATES:

Better make that 8 times.

The UK Today – State of Terror

Also, given recent events, please note that I may soon have to revise this post.