A Next Step? (the 7/7 London Bombings and the War on Terror)

National Review Online ^ | July 15, 2005 | William F. Buckley Jr.

[neverdem]

	E-mail Author Author Archive Send to a Friend Version

July 15, 2005,

12:01 p.m.

A Next Step?

Dealing with the terrorist threat after 7/7.

The Italian government seemed to be defining moderation when it resolved on Wednesday to bear down on terrorists, but only in a conventional tempo. The alternative was to take drastic means to ring in the proposed changes. These would permit police to hold suspects in detention not for twelve hours, but for 24. The measure would also permit the security detachment to archive e-mail communications for unspecified periods of time. The authority of government to expel illegal immigrants suspected of conniving with terrorist groups would be enhanced. The Minister of the Interior, Giuseppe Pisanu, found just the right language to do two things, the first, to call for the adoption of the new measures, the second, to decline fast-track parliamentary action. “The evaluation of circumstances and converging hints,” he said, “push us to think that such a thing is possible.” By “such a thing,” Mr. Pisanu means: a terrorist attack.

It had been a stunning 24 hours. The British identified all four of the men who had detonated the bombs in London. The examination of the culprits was extraordinary in its completeness. Consider Shehzad Tanweer. He was 22 years old, and his father operated a fish-and-chip shop in Leeds. Shehzad went to college in Leeds majoring in sports science. He was a cricketer who trained also in tai kwon do and judo.

A friend who knew him well stepped forward immediately to say that “Shazzy is the best lad I have ever met. He’s a top guy and a top lad. We play cricket together. He’s a bowler and a batsman. He wouldn’t do anything like this. He’s from a very strong family . . . Shehzad is a very kind person who would get along with anyone and anybody. He’s the kind of guy who would condemn extremism” — and engage in it.

The very same day that Shehzzad was identified, the Dutch released the spoken testimony of another young Muslim, Muhammad Bouyeri, who is 27. Last November, Bouyeri shot Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh six times in the throat, and then slashed it with a knife. In court, Bouyeri was anxious to make one thing very clear: “I acted out of conviction and not out of hate. If I’m ever released, I’d do the same again. Exactly the same.” He was not to be hurried on the point. “I don’t feel your pain,” he told van Gogh’s mother, who was sitting in the courtroom. “I don’t know what it’s like to lose a child that was brought into this world with so much pain and tears. I realize that my attitude is very confrontational for you and others. I hope that you will derive some comfort from the maximum sentence.” So it isn’t that Bouyeri is indifferent to the question of giving comfort to others. He authorizes us to take satisfaction from any severity to which the court is given in its sentence.

The two assailants leave westerners without speech, and terribly hard up for useful thought. It is hard to imagine better care or more opportunity than was given to the 22-year old Englishman, or greater tolerance than was given to the after-the-fact rhetoric of the Dutchman. We are apparently left with nothing better than the bumbling of the Italian Minister of the Interior, who acknowledges only the need for “the evaluation of circumstances and converging hints [which will] push us to think.”

The first thought, surely, has to be that not all young Muslims at large in Europe have a viral compulsion to put bombs in London subways or to shoot and stab provocative filmmakers. So having arrived at that thought, what is our next thought?

It is not highly developed, but it focuses necessarily on acute security measures. They mount aggression, we mount a defense. This is bitter medicine in that the countermeasures signal a victory for terrorism.

London withstood years of bombings organized by a sovereign madman who came to control Germany.

That threat, on reflection, seems simple: Cope with it by waging a world war. We know how to do that. We don’t know how to abort the evolution of young Muslims into murderers.

	http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200507151201.asp

[Marine_Uncle]

Not they can do much about it, but I think the Italians should be taking a more serious stand (perhaps they can stand on their heads or something), becuase a few days back we read an article here, forgot which one, to many, on the London terrorist attacks, that said Al Qaeda was planning a blitz in Italy, then Holland in that order.

[wildcatf4f3]

Maybe we could export planned Parenthood to the Mid East

[Marine_Uncle]

"Maybe we could export planned Parenthood to the Mid East."
Hey they do a great job of they do a great job of that already. Some a practicing in in Iraq on little kids that gather to receive candy, toys, and school supply from soldier and Marines. Latest fad. Run a truck with high explosives into a crowd of little kids. True brave desert warriors ah.

[freeangel]

save for later

[Fruitbat]

A next step should have been the first step!

Before you can correct a problem you have to know what it is. We are addressing the symptoms, not the root issue.

These terrorists ARE acting on what the Koran says:

[2.193] And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah

[8.39] And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do.

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

[9.123] O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

...just to cite a few.

The next step, again, what should have been the first step, is creating an environment where those enslaved to Islam are free to leave it's clutches w/o fear of muslim reprisal or "justice."

As to identifying the roor problem, what is anyone believing in the Koran supposed to believe when they read veres like the above or similar or supporting verses???

Those were just a handful found among the first 9 chapters, barely 5% of the Koran. I don't understand why anyone, that has truly read the Koran that is, has any difficultly understanding terrorism around the world, almost all of which is muslim sponsored and conducted.

As well, just about all of the worst nations where human attrocities and genocides are occurring or have occurred recently are in muslim dominated nations.

As long as people don't have the gumption to get to the true root cause, the problem will never be solved.

To think that such a society, as uncivil as they've been, and as defined by the above references straight out of the Koran, can peacefully coexist with Judeo-Christian nations is laughable and defies every shred of common sense and reason.

It's really simple folks, their (muslim) idea of "peace" is our (non-muslim) subjection to them, paying their tax, and being relegated to third class citizens. It really is that simple.

The question is "what can be done about it?" The answer to that is obvious. But to think that true Koran believing muslims en masse can peacefully coexist with western Christianized cultures is absolutely baseless.

As long as political leaders try to make Islam what it is not, then there will be no real progress in this area. The world went through the same exact exercise with Hitler. The primary difference being that Hitler simply believed that it was a different core of people that should dominate the earth and put others, predominantly Jews, but Christians and others also, into subjection and even death. There is little difference between the two.

The shame of it is all of the people in the muslim world being held in the shackles of Islam for fear of the ramifications of not doing so, namely death, and usually violent death. If muslims are willing to do this to their own people simply considering other philosophical options, then what is the world to make of mainstream Islam???

[Fruitbat]

Addendum;

Is it any wonder that few muslim controlled nations aren't in the dark ages, very realistically, and utter third world nations!

The few nations that aren't got that way due to American blood and toil having built the "goldmine" of the world in the oil fields for them and then handing it to them lock, stock, and barrel at no cost to them!