Thoughts to London Bombs

[scotsboy]

I live in the Middle East and think that I may have a slightly better "feel" for what the opinion is......as for the rest of your post its mince. If you think these bombings have anything to do with Iraq, you are wrong.

[wavy davy]

Scotsboy,

I've a wee bit of experience oif the Middle East myself, but I'll bow to your more contemporary view of that part of the world.

If the explosions have nothing to do with the Americans and Brits in Palestine and Iraq, then what have they got to do with?

BTW, I'm a bit hurt at your description of my post as "mince". It took me 15 minutes to write that. All right, I know, I should have spent the time doing something useful.

[Rheghead]

Thank goodness one or two people have now managed to get around to saying something rational here, instead of being brain washed into the standard sentimental response to these types of situations.

The English have this incessant habit of rubbing other peoples up the wrong way, then invariably sending in the Scottish to fight their battles - this has gone on for hundreds of years.

The IRA bombed England (and not Scotland and Wales) because some people had a cause to be agrieved (rightly or wrongly) with the English. Let's just hope that the current wave of cheesed off foreigners know the geographic and cultural difference between these countries as well.

And on the subject of sentimentality, I notice that we are all now being expected to have a co-ordinate two-minute silence this Thursday. If we had a two-minute silence for every tragedy in the world, then we'd allbe Trapest Monks. Why don't we all have a two-minute rant instead.

I actually agree with you that BRITAIN's (not Englands) involvement MAY have catalysed a very small number of sick individuals to explode those bombs in London.

But you are being very insensitive to other posters and to the victim's families FTM on this thread to spew cheap England vs Scottish propaganda. This thread was intended to let us express our condolences to the victim's families, not for you to issue neo-leftwing-Scottish Nationalist and isolationist Rhetoric.

Shame on you

[neep_docker]

This thread was intended to let us express our condolences to the victim's families

You see, here we go with this contrived sentimentality again.

Throughout most of March and April 2003, the US and British armed forces rode right through Iraq killing 100,000s of innocent people in their path, in order to take out just one wanted man. Yet when they found that man, they didn't kill him, they decidedhe should have a fair trial - unlike the 100,000s of innocent civilians left dead in their wake. Once again, they are the 'unpeople' - they don't matter, they're just caught in the cross-fire.

Now, where were you all with a thread to express your condolences then ?

The people who died in London last Thursday were likewise innocent people caught in the crossfire. To me they are equal to the ones I described above. No more, no less.

Let's just cut out the hypocrisy, please.

[scotsboy]

BTW, I'm a bit hurt at your description of my post as "mince".

You asume that I dont like mince

I just think that some compassion should be shown for the victims of this terrorist atrocity.

As for the reasons behind the attacks, they are long and detailed and would take more than the 15 minutes you took to cook your mince. However they relate to the enforced spread of Islam.

[Rheghead]

Now, where were you all with a thread to express your condolences then ?....Let's just cut out the hypocrisy, please.

On your first point, just look back at any thread on the Iraq war, you will see many expressions of grief for those caught up in the war.

On your second point, Here, Here! You are the one who sees our sentimentality as contrived, my feelings were from the heart...

[neep_docker]

On your second point, Here, Here! You are the one who sees our sentimentality as contrived, my feelings were from the heart...

But where, oh where is the outpouring of grief for today's tragedy, then ........

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4668721.stm

Yes, as I thought, passed without mention by the masses.

[wavy davy]

Scotsboy,

I must admit to being perplexed as to why a belief that the US and Britain's stance in the Middle East contributes to terrorism, somehow implies a lack of compassion for the victims of said terrorism. In my case at least, nothing is further from the truth.

As for your belief that the aforesaid stance has nothing to do with the bombings, judging by the papers today you seem to be in a minority. Admittedly that doesn't mean you're wrong. It means that MI5, MI6 and a large number of politicians and correspondents are. Mega mince.

[Rheghead]

But where, oh where is the outpouring of grief for today's tragedy, then ........

Yes, as I thought, passed without mention by the masses.

During the height of the dark days of IRA terrorism, there were countless acts of terrorism which were all worthy of outspoken Public condolence. However, the British Public ceased to be terrorised by it, they just got conditioned to it and thus unnewsworthy. This apathy imho played a part in the IRA surrender. Islamic terrorism will have the same affect on the British Public, they will just get on with their lives, as in the Blitz.

Just because the routine acts of terror that go on in Iraq go unmentioned doesn't mean they are unworthy of condolent commentary, we have already started to get conditioned to it, you can also call it resilience.

If you want to thrash out whether I think your insensitive comments re Eng v Scot or whether Scottish isolationism have any relevence to modern Islamic terrorism then start a new thread and lets get it on.

[neep_docker]

Just because the routine acts of terror that go on in Iraq go unmentioned doesn't mean they are unworthy of condolent commentary, we have already started to get conditioned to it, you can also call it resilience.

In that case, let's speed up that resilience by ignoring the London bombings and not mentioning it again.

[Rheghead]

Just because the routine acts of terror that go on in Iraq go unmentioned doesn't mean they are unworthy of condolent commentary, we have already started to get conditioned to it, you can also call it resilience.

In that case, let's speed up that resilience by ignoring the London bombings and not mentioning it again.

Don't worry, if it starts to happen on a daily occurence then you will have your wish come true. [sarcasm]But when they start targetting Edinburgh and Glasgow as a direct result of supposed 'extra attention' in Iraq given by (English coerced )Scottish roadside bombfodder[/sarcasm] then which side will you be on? Do you see Londoner lives as less important than those of Glaswegian's?
So far you have suggested that terrorism in London is unworthy of mentioning but Scotland is worth protecting and Terrorism in Iraq is worth mentioning, I cannot understand this disparity?


As Bush says, 'You are either with us or with the terrorists'

[neep_docker]

As Bush says, 'You are either with us or with the terrorists'

Oh, please ! With nonesense like that, you are the perfect embodiment of the drones who regurgitate rhetoric. You know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

[Rheghead]

As Bush says, 'You are either with us or with the terrorists'

Oh, please ! With nonesense like that, you are the perfect embodiment of the drones who regurgitate rhetoric. You know the price of everything, but the value of nothing.

Yet you still didn't address my points, I can only assume that you think that Londoner lives ARE less important than other nationalities.

The bigot is like the pupil of the eye, the more light you put upon it, the more it will contract.

[neep_docker]

Yet you still didn't address my points, I can only assume that you think that Londoner lives ARE less important than other nationalities.

Yawn...bore....read the thread before typing....see previous post:

The people who died in London last Thursday were likewise innocent people caught in the crossfire. To me they are equal to the ones I described above. No more, no less.

[Rheghead]

Yet you still didn't address my points, I can only assume that you think that Londoner lives ARE less important than other nationalities.

Yawn...bore....read the thread before typing....see previous post:

The people who died in London last Thursday were likewise innocent people caught in the crossfire. To me they are equal to the ones I described above. No more, no less.

Yet why do you want us to pour out sentiments for every attack in Iraq but you want the attacks in London to be unmentioned?

read the thread before typing....

[fred]

So without going into debate about the conflicts and history that led to the IRAs campaign of terror, you agree that the underlying causes are still there…….but their campaign in the UK has stopped (it could start again), why? Are you saying that the Government had nothing to do with this?
Also in terms of the Middle East, the case of Palestine is always trotted out, and for some reason everyone in the UK seems to think that the USA is to blame for their funding of the Zionist state of Israel……..speak to anyone in the Middle East and it is always Britain that is blamed for the state of Israel. Surely that cannot be laid at the door of Blair as well.

Britain must take it's share of the blame for the state of Isreal, as must Turkey, but America is the one largely responsible.

Zionism started long before the British Mandate. In the 19th century when Palestine was still part of the Ottoman empire, people in Turkey aquired land in Palestine through a legal loophole which they sold to the Zionists. Palestine was a British Mandate from 1920 to partitioning in 1948 and responsible for much of the Jewish settlement. There were a lot of Jewish refugees around from Germany and Eastern Europe and it was convenient for us. They were also responsible for the rather brutal putting down of a Palestinian Nationalist uprising in the 1930s. As for the creation of the state of Israel that was down to the Americans, they put preasure on a lot of poorer nations to get it passed by the UN. Since then Israel has been backed, armed and financed by the United States, including helping them to develop nuclear weapons in partnership with pre-apartheid South Africa and become the worlds sixth largest nuclear power.

There was also a lot of resentment against Britain because we promised the Arab countries of the Ottoman Empire indipendance in exchange for backing us in the first world war, a promise we broke. As for what happens in Northern Ireland, that will depend a lot on how many promises are broken there.

[neep_docker]

Excellent, fred - at last someone in the forum who can bring an informed and eloquent contribution to the debate.

In the 1990s, Israel was the world's 4th largest military power, I believe. It may still be, not sure. But Israel, as you point out, is yet another example of how we back terrorism in one country, but condemn it in another.

[Rheghead]

As far as I am aware, Israel armed itself in response to terrorism from factions from within itself and outwith its borders. A nation has a soveregn right to defend itself.

[neep_docker]

Rheghead, how many times do we have to flush before you go away ? If you can't contribute something of merit, then don't contribute at all.

[Rheghead]

I have been totally civil with you on this forum, yet you recourse to rudeness. I will leave you comments to the disgression of the moderators. Obvious you have nothing of merit to add to this thread. You have been well and truly beaten my friend!!

I am not leaving myself to be insulted on this thread again. Bye