Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Is London the new Kabul?

Years back, security experts and ordinary people were worried about the return of young mujahideen from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Under US watch and patronage, Osama Bin Laden and many other young Arab and Muslim youth were indoctrinated and trained to fight the Soviet army in Afghanistan, using heavy doses of religious dogma to increase their zeal.

After paying dearly for this short sighted policy on September 11, 2001, the US was supposed to have learnt its lesson. However, their close allies, the British, continued to try to exploit and appease Islamic extremists, even after a group of them bombed the London subway system on July 7, 2005, killing 52 people. London continues to be the home for the most extreme religious fanatics, operating in total freedom.

So, when a brilliant young doctor and his wife left Jordan two years ago, it might not have been too far fetched that he may become a target for the preachers of hate and violence who call London home (as suggested by Firas). The man and wife had clean security records, and were focused on academic and professional achievement rather than mischief. It has not been established yet in court whether they were really involved in the terror plots or to what extent. However, they do seem to have been mixing with a bad crowd.

Personally, I take little stock in the propaganda that tries to blame such conversions to fanaticism on the freedom which is enjoyed in the west. The descendants of the British Empire on which the sun never set can not be so impotent when dealing with a few loud mouthed welfare abusing fanatics. The country that did not hesitate to destroy Iraq and throw it’s population into massive turmoil in which hundreds of thousands have been killed and millions have been displaced can not be so sensitive to the supposed civil rights of a few trouble makers who can be dealt with in a legal and civilized manner. The government that railroaded Abdelbaset Megrahi for the sole purpose of extorting the Libyan government is not so sensitive to due process or justice. The “freedom” argument for such blatant harboring of inciters of terror rings quite hollow.

It is not difficult to conclude that British authorities harbor and tolerate these people because they serve a purpose. I might add that this purpose is not benign. The end result is that terror emanating from the preachers of hate serves to marginalize the Muslim community in Britain, and fosters xenophobia with the British public. Abroad, this tolerance legitimizes extremism, and is a source of pressure on Arab and Muslim countries to act in a similar way with their own extremists. Only a lunatic or a traitor would try to emulate this behavior.

So, while we are worried about fanatics returning from Iraq, Pakistan or Afghanistan, it might be worth while to remember that Britain is the only country that offers preachers of death residency, welfare and legal protection.

Cheerio!

21 Comments:

At 6:49 PM, Blogger Mohanned said...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288015,00.html

Khalaf, check this out..The meeting took place in amman!

 
At 8:00 PM, Blogger Khalaf said...

Interesting. The terrorists taunt them even as they try dialog.

 
At 9:21 PM, Anonymous kinzi said...

Khalaf, you are the first Arab I have heard use the term 'appeasement' in this manner. It is a concept that frightens me (easily scared in this days I guess)and until now have only read in righter-wing editorials.

 
At 10:27 PM, Blogger Khalaf said...

Maybe I could have used a better word. Any suggestions?

 
At 9:05 AM, Anonymous kinzi said...

No, I think it was the perfect word to describe what is happening, even if the righter-wings use it. :)

 
At 9:34 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Khalaf,

It is not difficult to conclude that British authorities harbor and tolerate these people because they serve a purpose.

Do you really think so? It's Britain's fault? WHo is indoctrinated Jordanians in Jordan? I've been pointing out for years on some of the crazy shit that Jordanian blog commenters say. And the poll numbers showing public opinion aren't exactly great, either. The only more pro-terrorism people in the middle east are Palestinians, according to the latest programmer_craig study.

I'm glad you aren't happy with the nutcases who commit terror attacks, but I think you may be displacing the blame to someplace it doesn't belong.

I do agree with you that GB is far too tolerant of Islamists. There have been several undercover documentaries shot inside British mosqus in the last couple years, and the filth that is being peddled from the (at least some) British Mosques is mind blowing. People would go to prison for saying that kind of thing in the US. I don't know why Britain tolerates people who are openly calling for violence - that isn't protected speech.

But I'm not British, so...

By the way, I'm curious about how you think the US gained so much in the "islamic Credentials" department that we were able to offer religious indoctrination to Mujahedeen in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Are there really Muslims that take their religious training from non-Muslims? We did dump a lot of money and encourage other Muslim governments to support the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan, but that's hardly the same thing as creating the beast.

 
At 2:00 PM, Blogger Khalaf said...

Craig: This is my point. 'Asha, assuming he is guilty, was indoctrinated in the UK, not in Jordan. The reality is that despite grievances, Jordanians in Jordan are law abiding and at peace. So what if your "scientific" poll shows that Jordanians support terror. My study shows that a large numbers of Americans are religious fanatics who think that they can solve all of their problems by force, even using nuclear weapons. The same study also shows that many Americans support Israel because they hope this will precipitate Armageddon and the return of Christ.

As for your question about American credentials to teach Islam to Muslims, I respect your intelligence too much to think that this is a serious question. I never said that Americans did the training.

 
At 2:06 PM, Anonymous Ali said...

London is the New Nazi Berlin.

 
At 9:32 PM, Blogger programmer craig said...

I never said that Americans did the training.

Then why on earth would we get the blame? We didn't teach "jihad" to the Mujahedeen. Blame the people who did.

 
At 9:51 PM, Blogger Khalaf said...

I understand you being defensive. The role of the US in the rise of Islamist militancy in Afghanistan is well known and well documented. Yes, the US needs to share the blame. Sorry.

 
At 11:08 PM, Blogger Mohanned said...

Craig,
The bottom line is that america fought a proxy war in afghanistan against the soviets, the "mujahedeen" fought with american arms paid for by oil money, just like saddam fought iran with american arms after the fall of tha Shah..Now after the soviet empire fell down both the "mujahdeen' and america needed an enemy to fight, the "Mujahedeeen" thought they were behind the fall of berlin wall and became heroes among the public, so who is next for them, for sure it would be america..And by the way america and its media is serving as the main recruiting tool for the "mujahedeen" along with aljazeera and such..So as Khalaf said, you share the blame..

 
At 2:14 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Khalaf,

I understand you being defensive.

I'm not being defensive. The US did the right thing in supporting the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan. I'm not embarrassed (or defensive) about it.

The role of the US in the rise of Islamist militancy in Afghanistan is well known and well documented. Yes, the US needs to share the blame. Sorry.

I didn't see you blaming anyone but the US, so I don't understand how you now talk about "sharing" the blame. And, no, I don't think the US deserves any blame at all for the fact that the insurgents we supported in Afghanistan became jihadi terrorists. The US supported anti-communist insurgents in dozens of countries during the cold war. The only ones who became terrorists were the Muslim groups. That's on you. Not on us. The US did not provide them with the religious indoctrination that caused them to become terrorists. We only provided material support. We didn't brainwash them, and as I already pointed out.... the US couldn't have brainwashed Muslims if it tried.

And, finally, Islamic terrorists didn't begin in Afghanistan. It began in Palestine. Who are you going to blame for that? Jews?

 
At 2:28 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Mohanned,

The bottom line is that america fought a proxy war in afghanistan against the soviets, the "mujahedeen" fought with american arms paid for by oil money

Yes. So what? The US and the USSR fought dozens of proxy wars in the second half of the 20th century, using the methods you describe.

just like saddam fought iran with american arms after the fall of tha Shah..

It's not a big deal, but I want to point out that Saddam was not armed by the United States. He was armed by the Soviet Union and China, during the 1970s. Iran was armed by the United States and Britain.

Now after the soviet empire fell down both the "mujahdeen' and america needed an enemy to fight, the "Mujahedeeen" thought they were behind the fall of berlin wall and became heroes among the public, so who is next for them, for sure it would be america..

I can understand why thinking this comforst you, but it doesn't change the fact that Muslims have been committing terrorist attacks on Americans since the 1970s. Long before the end of the cold war. The war in Afghanistan merely provided a safe haven for terrorists to operate from. Much as Lebanon did in the 1980s, and Palestinian territories did, before that.

And by the way america and its media is serving as the main recruiting tool for the "mujahedeen" along with aljazeera and such..So as Khalaf said, you share the blame..

I disagree. We are only to blame for not taking out the Taliban in the 1990s when it became clear just how bad they were. We could have prevented 9/11 if we'd done that.

I don't understand what you mean about American media being to blame. Of course we promoted our proxy in the war in Afghanistan. Why shouldn't we? You think we should have condemned the side we were supporting?

 
At 2:44 AM, Blogger Mohanned said...

I hate blame games, saddam fought iran by the support of the US and Oil rich gulf countries, I don't know if you have ever seen him sitting with rumsfeld in his ol' days, anyway as I said I hate the blame, the US is not innocent neither the "mujahdeen" and we avergae Joes are lost between:)
By Joes, I mean jordanians;)

 
At 2:56 AM, Blogger Mohanned said...

http://al-arabiat.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-sometimes-i-feel-that-technology-is.html

http://al-arabiat.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-sometimes-i-feel-that-technology.html

Thats some of my views-if you are interested.

 
At 6:15 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

I hate blame games

But this post is a "blame game", mohanned. Why are you participating in it if you hate it so much?

The post is about how it's not really the fault of Jordanians, that Jordanians are involved in terrorism. Right? And if it's not Jordan's fault, it must be somebody else's. Britain has been identified as the source of the problem, in this post.

saddam fought iran by the support of the US and Oil rich gulf countries

So....?

I don't know if you have ever seen him sitting with rumsfeld in his ol' days

Which matters, why... exactly? Have you seen any Americans claiming that the US didn't support Iraq, in the Iran/Iraq war? The war started in 1980... Iran was still holding the diplomatic staff of the US embassy hostage in Tehran. Who the hell do you think we'd support?

anyway as I said I hate the blame, the US is not innocent neither the "mujahdeen" and we avergae Joes are lost between:)

Yes, I noticed you said that, and yet I also notice you do not blame Jordanian mother's and father's for raising Jordanian terrorists. *shrug*

I recall Mohammed Atta's father claiming there was some sort of mistake, and his son would never have been involved in the 9/11 attacks. And then a couple years later, he was praising his son's participation in the attacks, and calling him a hero and a martyr.

Which set of statements was true? I suspect, considering what Atta actually *did*, that the later statements were the true feelings of Atta senior.

By Joes, I mean jordanians;)

Yes. That's you. Innocents. That's why I never see Jordanians preaching hate in Jordanian blog comment sections :P

That's why I've spent the last two years praising Jordanians for their tolerance and understanding of complex issues.

 
At 7:06 AM, Blogger Mohanned said...

Actually I did blame "us" for teaching hate and intolerance, but I don't have to list all my beliefs and views on each post I comment on..America has interests just like jordan has and politics are dirty, and it gets dirtier when relegion gets into the mix..
This war shouldn't be fought by arms; how much did the US spend on this? What if 10% of this money went to american organizations to help the poor and educate children? Why should this money go through corrupt regimes that claim this aid to be "theirs"? America is loosing the hearts, people used to LOVE america, why do you think america's image is so bad on the world stage?It is not only in muslim and arab countries, a recent poll in europe and america showed more people think of america as threat to world peace than of al-qaeda, iran and north korea.. I hope that after 18 months a good man will take charge or else the situation will get worse..
I came to america 3 years ago to persue my education.During those 3 years I came to understand how americans think and on what basis they behave or react, but what about the 1.2 billion muslims that don't know? What about those people who saw the abu ghreib pictures and came to the conclusion that all amricans are like this? I know that muslims and arabs did worse to each other but you have to study the arab mindset to understand why it is "acceptable" to be persecuted by someone you know while a stranger isn't allowed to look at arab woman..

Anyway, in my humble opinion force will not solve anything, if we want to win this war we have to be human-I don't know if human is the right word since humanity lately became and insult; animals have more mercy on each other..

Good luck.

 
At 7:43 AM, Blogger Khalaf said...

Come on Craig. We don't need to keep posting to meet your standards of opposing terrorism. You know very well that I have posted many times against terrorism, and I have never sought to pass the blame. I don't do this to keep you happy, but to express what I believe.

Having said that, the US, Israel and the west in general have done their best to promote the rise of militant Islamism, including Bin Laden and Hamas. The fact that you see justification in that doesn't mean that they didn't do it. They did do it. They knew their ideology, methodology and objectives, and helped them anyway.

As for Asha being raised a terrorist (assuming he is guilty), as you say, well, his parents raised him to be a doctor (along with seven also well educated siblings). He became a terrorist in the UK. If this fact doesn't suit your stereotypes, well, too bed.

 
At 11:38 PM, Blogger Mohanned said...

Regarding the media, craig, I was just watching fox news when an "islam expert" suggested that all muslims are terrorists and should be killed and persecuted, she said that there is no moderate muslims and they are all full of hate..She had about 10 minutes on air..

You gotta love fox noise, right? The hate that those people spill on the air waves are just pathetic, the guest name I think was biriggete something..Ann coulter, rush limbah, pat robertson, etc... and we have bin laden, al zaweheri, etc..

The guest on fox news wanted to kick all muslims out of america, and ann coulter suggested that all muslims must be killed and the ones who live ahould be converted to christanity..You gottaa love the new hitlers..(on both sides of course)

 
At 8:40 PM, Anonymous Don Cox said...

"It is not difficult to conclude that British authorities harbor and tolerate these people because they serve a purpose."____They are tolerated because in Britain we bend over backward to encourage free speech. Once you start imprisoning people for ranting, you are on the slippery path to a police state. In some countries a man can be jailed for "insulting the President" or "insulting Islam". We don't want to go down that road - although I suspect the terrorists would like us to, so that they can claim to be persecuted.

 
At 5:39 PM, Blogger Abu Daoud said...

Dear Craig,

I think you have forgotten the Golden Rule of the Midddle East:

It is never the Arab's fault.

And the seocnd is like it:

It is NEVER Islam's fault.

Just thought I'd remind you :-)

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home