http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/09/12/do1202 .xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/09/12/ixopinion.html Stop blaming America for terrorism By Anne Applebaum (Filed: 12/09/2006) Daily Telegaph
'Poised as I am, halfway between the two cultures, it was a little strange watching British reactions to events in America last week. It was a little strange even being in Britain last week. On Tuesday after hijacked planes had hit targets in Washington, where my family live, and New York, where most of my friends live, I was standing in Bond Street, dialling and redialling their numbers on my mobile telephone, unable to get through." No, that wasn't plagiarism: it was the opening paragraph of an article I wrote five years ago in The Sunday Telegraph, describing British and American reactions to the events of September 11, 2001. Yes, I realise that it's bad taste to quote oneself. But in truth, I can no longer remember the events clearly. I see them now through the haze of everything that happened afterwards: Afghanistan, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, Madrid, London. Inevitably, I also see them through the haze of cliché. The image of the Twin Towers burning and collapsing no longer feels shocking. advertisement Nevertheless, I think it's worth looking back at what people really felt on September 11, 2001, because not everyone felt the same, then or later. Certainly it's true that, five years ago, Tony Blair spoke of standing "shoulder to shoulder" with America, that Iain Duncan Smith (remember him?) echoed him, and that Jacques Chirac was on his way to Washington to say the same. But it's also true that this initial wave of goodwill hardly outlasted the news cycle. Within a couple of days a Guardian columnist wrote of the "unabashed national egotism and arrogance that drives anti-Americanism among swaths of the world's population". A Daily Mail columnist denounced the "self-sought imperial role" of the United States, which he said had "made it enemies of every sort across the globe". That week's edition of Question Time featured a sustained attack on Phil Lader, the former US ambassador to Britain and a man who had lost colleagues in the World Trade Centre who seemed near to tears as he was asked questions about the "millions and millions of people around the world despising the American nation". At least some Britons, like many other Europeans, were already secretly or openly pleased by the 9/11 attacks. And all of this was before Afghanistan, before Tony Blair was tainted by his friendship with George Bush, and before anyone knew the word "neo-con", let alone felt the need to claim not to be one. The dislike of America, the hatred for what it was believed to stand for capitalism, globalisation, militarism, Zionism, Hollywood or McDonald's, depending on your point of view was well entrenched. To put it differently, the scorn now widely felt in Britain and across Europe for America's "war on terrorism" actually preceded the "war on terrorism" itself. It was already there on September 12 and 13, right out in the open for everyone to see. Since then, the changes in both foreign and domestic policy in the US have been profound. Although I don't need to remind anyone of the former, the latter have been largely invisible abroad. Living in Washington for the past four years, I watched as the American government reorganised itself, often clumsily, much as it reorganised in the late 1940s, at the start of the Cold War. The Bush Administration with the support of the Democrats in Congress and elsewhere created an enormous new Department of Homeland Security, a new directorate of intelligence. The Department of State finally shifted its attention to the Muslim world; new funds were made available for the study of Arabic and Farsi. For better or for worse, the conversation in Washington changed dramatically, too, and as a result is now largely focused on problems of Islamic fundamentalism, the Middle East, and democracy (and the lack thereof) in the Arab world. For better or for worse, the "war on terrorism" has become what the Cold War used to be: the focal point of American foreign policy, the central concern around which everything else is organised. The same cannot be said of Europe. Despite the fact that the worst subsequent terrorist attacks have taken place here, not in the US and although it now appears that the most dangerous pool of Islamic fanatics is here, not the Middle East I don't detect a similar desire in London or Berlin to rearrange priorities or to change the tone of national debate, let alone to forge a stronger alliance with the US or to engage in what ought to be a joint project. In part, this is thanks to the extraordinary diplomatic failure of the Bush Administration, which, believing its military power entitled it to arrogance, spurned America's traditional alliances and launched a war in Iraq without making any preparations for the consequences. Although much of the past year has been spent making up lost ground, it's hard to see how this President, at least, is ever going to be able to build the kind of international coalition necessary to fight what will have to be an international war of ideas against radical fundamentalism. But perhaps Europe's failure to enthusiastically join the "war on terrorism" was in some sense preordained. While not entirely incorrect, the notion that President Bush has wasted international post-9/11 sympathy is not entirely accurate either. As I say, at the time of the attacks, influential Europeans, and influential Britons, were already disinclined for their own reasons to sympathise with any American tragedy. Instead of pointing fingers, the fifth anniversary of 9/11 might be a good time to reverse course. If "war on terrorism" has become an unpopular term, then call it something else. Call it a "war on fanaticism". Or as we used to say in the Cold War call it a "struggle for hearts and minds" in the Islamic communities of Europe and the Middle East. For whatever it's called, it won't succeed without both American and European support, without American and European mutual sympathy. And whatever it's called, if it fails, the consequences will be felt on both sides of the Atlantic. Comments Let's go back in time. At the end of the 1990s, the US was engaged in an orgy of arrogant - and as we have seen from Enron etc. - supremely corrupt business expansion. The US was treading on everyone's toes, and doing business in a dishonest way. To pile arrogance on arrogance, when the 9/11 attacks occured, Americans embarked on another orgy: one of faux innocence and a claim that they had done nothing wrong. The towers were a hive of some of the worst examples of this corrupt global business aparatus. It is no surprise it was attacked. The day Americans come close to admitting they have a bad inlfuence on the world, will be the day we might be able to cool things down and get some peace. Posted by Bob Macdonald on September 12, 2006 9:26 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Bob%20Macdonald%20-%20September%2012,%202006%209:2 6%20AM> Report this comment To change the hearts and minds of the Islamic community in Britain can only be acheived by integration, in my opinion, the one with the other. Ask Mr and Mrs Average British Citizen to break bread with or generally hob nob over the garden fence with Muslim neighbours and I suspect there would be few volunteers, and vice versa. If, however, there were stringent and enforceable laws in place which would require immigrants to learn our language and acknowledge our culture, instead of them trying to impose their way of life upon us. Then perhaps some progress toward integration would be made. G Brown Posted by gordon brown on September 12, 2006 9:23 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20gordon%20brown%20-%20September%2012,%202006%209:23 %20AM> Report this comment The edition of Question Time after 9/11 was the watershed for me in how I see the BBC, and indeed most of those on the left. The aggression demonstrated by those in the audience, who had clearly been selected by the BBC for such a purpose, was breathtaking. From that day on I have never taken anything the BBC has produced at face value. The West and America in particular, has nothing to apologise for. Islamic terrorism reflects the economic failure of Islamic states that, rather than looking inward for the causes of this failure, prefer to embrace victim hood and blame the US. Posted by Peter Arnold on September 12, 2006 9:20 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Peter%20Arnold%20-%20September%2012,%202006%209:20 %20AM> Report this comment History did not start on 11th September 2001. Residents of the US were largely responsible for funding terrorism in Ireland and that should not be casually forgotten. As far as anti Americanism is concerned, it is more the ignorance that has been evident in foreign policy that irritates, rather than any animosity towards the American people. There is no evidence to support any fundamental understanding of the Middle East in senior figures in the current US administration, nor is their any evidence of a cohesive plan for the invasion of Iraq. When last I saw any statistics, only 5% of the US population held passports and only 20% of Congress. With the outside world seemingly holding so little interest, US influence in overseas actions need not always be welcomed or admired. Our own involvement is not to be admired either and that may also fuel resentment of US activity, by association. I'm sure Bush and his cohorts think they mean well, but foreign policy is not just foreign to the Bush administration in its geographical meaning. Posted by Hamish on September 12, 2006 9:17 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Hamish%20-%20September%2012,%202006%209:17%20AM> Report this comment Rubbish. Empty, pointless rubbish. Posted by Bill on September 12, 2006 9:16 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Bill%20-%20September%2012,%202006%209:16%20AM> Report this comment The scorn felt world-wide for America's militaristic approach to the rest of us was there long before September 12th or even the 11th, or even before that. It existed in proportion to the injustice visited on the rest of the world by an America besotted by its narcissistic focus on its own interests at the expense of others, and grows in proportion to the death and destruction visited on the innocent by America and its protegees and partners. You want to win the struggle for the hearts and minds of others? Stop thinking that could possibly happen while you subjugate them to achieve your strategic goals. Stop imagining that it's merely a defective PR exercise that's created the animosity, and deal with the root cause: America's hostile, destructive behaviours. Recognise among other evils the role America has played in preventing democracy with its support for the likes of Saddam Hussein. America may still become the force for good that the fabulists imagine it to be. Posted by Hasan Bateson on September 12, 2006 9:09 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Hasan%20Bateson%20-%20September%2012,%202006%209:0 9%20AM> Report this comment I am an unabashed supporter of America, except in one regard - America's unequivocal support for the IRA when the IRA was murdering innocent civilians in England. Perhaps the (sad and regretable) sentiment you saw after 9/11 was a feeling that the biter has been bitten. Posted by malcolm scoggins on September 12, 2006 8:59 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20malcolm%20scoggins%20-%20September%2012,%202006%20 8:59%20AM> Report this comment As Applebaum's hints but does not quite point out: It is hard for us Yanks to see what the Europeans bring to the table in the fight about Islamic fascists. Indeed, it seems that most Europeans believe the table does not exist. This makes forming an alliance difficult, as alliances are based on mutuality of outlooks and aims. The "diplomatic failure" of the Bush administration prior to Iraq was, ironically, caused by the very reflexive anti-American impulses in Europe that she decries as impeding the war today. Chirac, de Villepin, Schroeder - all of them, for crass domestic reasons, cynically used the UN-Iraq negotiations to deprive the United States of a serious moment before the Security Council. Yes, many Europeans think we are clueless or worse. Still, it's hard even for persons sympathetic to Europe to see a single thing many Europeans are willing to fight for - with the exception of government subsidies. Americans, not Europeans, are, mistakes and all, trying to do something about the enemy. Meanwhile, it seems that most European politicians imply no enemy really exists, even as they do everything they can, including throwing away freedom of speech, to appease the non-enemy. European denial was a necessary and even sufficient cause of the Second World War. Fifty millions died. How many more will die this time because Europeans cannot pull their heads from the sand? Posted by Scott Riley on September 12, 2006 8:59 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Scott%20Riley%20-%20September%2012,%202006%208:59% 20AM> Report this comment 'Stop blaming America for terrorism'- America is to be blamed for betraying the 'American dream'. Bush and his cronies on the one hand (mainly Cheney,Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz as architects of the aggression against Iraq), the Democrats on the other hand (mainly John Kerry with his failed, luke warm election campaign in the spirit of political escapism). Before all the Democrats are in charge of calling a spade a spade again. For that is the essence of checks and balances citizens can rely on political alternative(s) at all times. But governing the res publica demands leadership based on public transparency and integrity. The world needs back badly an America of spirituality and reliability! Posted by Rolf Joachim Siegen, Kiev on September 12, 2006 8:58 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Rolf%20Joachim%20Siegen,%20Kiev%20-%20September%20 12,%202006%208:58%20AM> Report this comment Anne Applebaum is too simplistic in her distinction between "right" and "left" in today's world. She has overlooked the alienation of conservatives who uphold the rule of law, and who believe that the invasion of Iraq was a criminal violation of the UN Charter. Posted by Edmund Burke on September 12, 2006 8:47 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Edmund%20Burke%20-%20September%2012,%202006%208:47 %20AM> Report this comment Oh dear Annie. I much respected you before this article, having read your milestone history of the Russian Gulag system. My Russian Doctor wife also embraced your book. But here you are just plain wrong. Posted by Stuart on September 12, 2006 8:46 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Stuart%20-%20September%2012,%202006%208:46%20AM> Report this comment Anne Applebaum is certainly a lady of perception and one that has managed to see through the haze of 'patriotism' laid by Bush . What Americans forget is that America sponsored terrorism (particularly in my native Ireland) for decades, before the hen came home to roost. Yes, Europe is anti-American, Yes, we do resent the 'poodle' stand of Blair and Yes, we do resent the incursion upon our rights in all aspects of our lives, by Homeland Security. Re-naming the offensive will not change that. Bush has to respect the democracy that he states to support, whether that is in Gaza, Iran or Palestine. He can align his country with Israel (driven mainly by his members in the Senate) and arm them against the weaker foe, but he gains no respect for his hypocrisy. If he wants to defeat terrorism and extremism, he should first look to his own Administration and understand Europeans do not take his fine words as those of a great statesman, but of those of a desperate President of an insular country, with a flawed foreign policy. Posted by Seamus Conygham on September 12, 2006 8:21 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Seamus%20Conygham%20-%20September%2012,%202006%208 :21%20AM> Report this comment I am not sure that your correspondent is correct in saying that many people in this country hate America and all it stands for, especially as this seems to be based on the opinions of a few journalists and others in the public eye. The demonstration of grief and support that followed 9/11 suggests that for the majority this was not the case. These were spontaneous acts by the much-maligned man in the street. What followed in the press were the writings of a very few, and looking at the publications quoted, these same people would probably take a contrary view whatever the subject matter it is smart so to do. However, some things have truly annoyed people and caused a lessening of sympathy for the U.S. These would include a grinning, posturing pseudo-cowboy with all the charm and public relations skills of a rattlesnake. Add to that a total arrogance and disregard for any opinions other than his and his coteries own and the picture is most unattractive. Why should we like or trust someone in the most powerful position in the world, when we see that person initiate an action such as the invasion of Iraq, which was clearly less than well prepared and based on no evidence whatsoever? I believe there is a great willingness and desire in this country to defeat the menace that is threatening our societies, but this needs to be a considered and co-operative response, not another screenplay for a kids matinee western. Posted by David Segrove on September 12, 2006 8:10 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20David%20Segrove%20-%20September%2012,%202006%208:1 0%20AM> Report this comment Unlike the fanatical muslim countries, the USA doesn't spend a lot of money on propaganda. Really, we need to hear the American side of the story to get a balanced view. The second point that emerges is that moderate muslims should be cultivated. Their views should be spread so the average European muslim will hear two versions of his/her religion. Posted by Alan Sholto on September 12, 2006 8:01 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Alan%20Sholto%20-%20September%2012,%202006%208:01% 20AM> Report this comment Well said. However, the islamofacist train has already been rolling too long and it may be too late to prevent serious changes to society. Posted by Peter on September 12, 2006 7:33 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Peter%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:33%20AM> Report this comment September 11 served a particular purpose for the American establishment, in that it became the occasion for launching campaigns that had nothing to do with its proximate causes and everything to do with prior strategic obsessions. In case of terror, it's been said that publicity is the oxygen on which it thrives. It is interesting to speculate on what would have happened if, say, global media organisations were to get together and decide to deny them this publicity, by not covering terror attacks as they take place anywhere in the world. In real life our chances of being struck down by a speeding bus in a busy street are far higher than being the victim of a terrorist attack, and this would restore a sense of balance. Moreover it would also deny to terrorists their principal weapon the ability to create fear. Terror might fall into disuse as a political tactic if it could not achieve its principal objective. This is a perspective worth keeping in mind as we go about our daily business, instead of succumbing to the fear and paranoia that the so-called war on terror has created. Posted by <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/exit.jhtml?exit=http://Manchester> Dr Kailash Chand on September 12, 2006 7:31 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Dr%20Kailash%20Chand%20-%20September%2012,%202006% 207:31%20AM> Report this comment Suspicious as I am of 20th century war analogies, I am not immune to the irony that this time America is taking the brunt of a war and Europe is hanging back. Perhaps when they have their own "Pearl Harbor" Europe will join in. Posted by <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/exit.jhtml?exit=http://hairybeast.wordpress .com/> The Hairy Beast on September 12, 2006 7:30 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20The%20Hairy%20Beast%20-%20September%2012,%202006%2 07:30%20AM> Report this comment What a pity the US, or at least the current administration and Anne Applebaum - still cannot, or will not understand the Islamic world. It is not complicated. Look at Gaza and the West Bank, look at Iraq. But to do this would be to admit that US policy on Israel has been grossly, manifestly one-sided. The fall of the Twin Towers marked the end of post Cold War US supremacism -they should have learned from what happened but they learned the wrong lessons. Why should we support the US? Posted by iainmorse on September 12, 2006 7:28 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20iainmorse%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:28%20AM > Report this comment I don´t blame the US, Anne. Every right thinking person prefers the Western option to the nihlism offered by the islamists. However, I do blame your President for starting a war on a country that had nothing to do with Al-Queda. Posted by Anthony Horner on September 12, 2006 7:18 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Anthony%20Horner%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207: 18%20AM> Report this comment The current crisis cannot be thought to be parallel to the Cold War. Such an analysis is deeply flawed. The Soviet Empire was a European philosophy tacked on to a Christian-based culture and the important parts of the Soviet regime were more similar in thinking to the West than they were to the underlying cultures of Central Asian republics. We understood what the communist ideology and policies sought(and were at times halfway towards ourselves in the post-war Socialist governments in Europe). The Islamist threat now is quite different and we have no common basis with the Islamic world, which does not in many parts even use the ideas of democracy tongue in cheek as did the Soviets. It would be an enormous error to think that we could apply the same thinking to the current problem. Terrorism is only a trivial manifestation of the true threat. A whole new paradigm is needed and a new approach to this different threat to the West is needed. Posted by F.Cunctator on September 12, 2006 7:17 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20F.Cunctator%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:17%20 AM> Report this comment Anne is right. The "war" of the free world against muslim mass murderers did not start on 11th Sep 2001. It is simply perceived that way. The "war on terror" phrase attributed to Bush since that day has made it seem like an American initiative. This misconception is part of the reason that the west is made out to be the aggressor. The war was, in fact, started by Al Qaida against the free world, well before "9/11" and the correct word to describe it is their own: "jihad". For the west, the war being waged in Afghanistan could better be described as freedom's defence against jihad. It is important that the aggressor is correctly identified. Posted by R Brady on September 12, 2006 7:14 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20R%20Brady%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:14%20AM > Report this comment Valid assessment Posted by Rick on September 12, 2006 7:10 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Rick%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:10%20AM> Report this comment Please, stand with us. But, if need be, Americans will stand alone. As Britons once did. Posted by Jim Salois on September 12, 2006 7:02 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Jim%20Salois%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:02%2 0AM> Report this comment Excuse me. The rest of the world knows plenty about terror. Britain bombed by the IRA. Palestinians slaughtered by Israelis. Chileans, Iraqis, Iranians etc etc tortured and killed by local strongmen. Did America object? No, in each case America funded the terrorists, whether it be the IRA, Israel, Pinochet, early Saddam when he was "our" strongman, the Shah, etc. And on 9/11 the Americans got a taste of this horror. Their reaction? Well, over 100,000 innocent civilians have now perished in the US's "war against terror". But you, like so many ignorant US apologists, simply whine that the world should be standing with America. Only American dead count, I suppose. Posted by Mod on September 12, 2006 7:00 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Mod%20-%20September%2012,%202006%207:00%20AM> Report this comment There is an element of truth in this: terrorists really have no cause and have latched onto 'Islam' as an excuse. True believers should long ago have disowned them. The terrorists should be seen for what they are: a bunch of psychopathic, dysfunctional killers with no respect for life, beliefs or liberty. Posted by swatantra nandanwar on September 12, 2006 7:00 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20swatantra%20nandanwar%20-%20September%2012,%202006 %207:00%20AM> Report this comment The USA has one major success in the war on terror - since the September 11 attacks brought home the reality of terrorism, they stopped funding the IRA, which is now no longer a menace here. The sympathy certain Americans I knew felt for the IRA beggared belief; at least these 'radical Islamists' aren't collecting money from rich non-Muslims in the UK, for all our alleged disloyalty. Posted by Spacy Sunday on September 12, 2006 6:59 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Spacy%20Sunday%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:59 %20AM> Report this comment Without America, the rest of the world looks puny compared to the islamic madmen that will stop at nothing to defeat and enslave us all. Long live U.S.A (warts and all) Posted by r bradley on September 12, 2006 6:58 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20r%20bradley%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:58%20 AM> Report this comment Whether or not we blame the US full stop. I think at this juncture of history it would be wise for us to consider how we have contributed to this mess. We in the western civilised democratic (sic) world have reached this point leaving a bloody trail behind us. I mention only the 30+ million of WWII and the 10+ million of WWI for starters. So we are hardly in a position to totally condemn those who are against our way now. Posted by Ian Morris on September 12, 2006 6:57 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Ian%20Morris%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:57%2 0AM> Report this comment Yet another American with a talent for missing the point. When the US really puts pressure (like cutting its $3 billion subsidies) on Israel to get out of the West Bank and dismantle the Jewish settlements there and to stop treating the one million Israeli Arabs as second class citizens, then many people in Europe and the Muslim world might just see America as a force for justice, democracy and human rights, instead of a nation just pretending to be a paragon and model for us all. This would also greatly reduce the number of recruits to terrorist organizations. The latest US example of shooting themselves in the foot was their licensing of Israel to slaughter Lebanese civilians over the capture of two Israeli soldiers. And you still cannot understand why you are loathed. Posted by Barry Ward on September 12, 2006 6:56 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Barry%20%20Ward%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:5 6%20AM> Report this comment As a former Muslim, and as a woman, I know that there are bigger problems than the Western World is beginning to admit. Islam itself teaches violence against "infidel" powers. The blokes who perpetrated the London bombs were raised in the UK, were well educated and had never stepped foot in Iraq, Pakistan or Afghanistan. Mohammad Atta and other 9/11 attackers weren't radicalised until they were living in Western Europe despite being educated as engineers by Western nations. Most Muslims won't commit violence but they support it. Islam is the common denominator and we must save other women who were not as lucky as me to escape from its clutches. The goal of Islam is to create Eurabia, an Islamic state in which frightened Europeans will become second-class citizens. Posted by ASMA BINT MARWAN on September 12, 2006 6:49 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20ASMA%20BINT%20MARWAN%20-%20September%2012,%202006% 206:49%20AM> Report this comment I, like many Americans, are getting tired of the "bashing" we receive everyday from around the world. If we wanted to take over a country why do we send food, tents when needed, medicines and monetary help? We ask nothing in return and accept these items as humanitarian aid. While it is somewhat old now to look at what the United States after WWII did for countless numbers of countries big and small. No-one has ever told me why freedom to come and go, the freedom to start business, the freedom of religion to all: What is so horrible about these freedoms that warrants such an outcry against us? We have even helped countries we have no diplomatic relationships with. When a disaster hits these countries I do not see other countries being first with aid/help. Maybe the United States should return to thee "isolationism" that was predominate in the early 1900's. I then wonder which country will fill the void when we left. Lastly, there are many people waiting at the gates of America to start a new life. I do not see and I have never heard of Americans rushing to leave the United States for other countries to start over!! Posted by Theodore on September 12, 2006 6:29 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Theodore%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:29%20AM> Report this comment Until Europe and to a lesser extent the USA realise that terrorism from whatever quarter is terrorism the status will remain unchanged. The notion that there are 'good' terrorists (those with whose cause you agree) and 'bad' terrorists (those with whose cause you do not agree) is the root cause of the problem and the inhibition of a proper solution. One can not applaud a Palestinian suicide bomber killing innocents in an Israeli supermarket and condemn those who bomb innocents on a London tube train. It is imperative that the world condemns ALL terrorism and coordinates a common approach to the problem. Posted by Graham on September 12, 2006 6:19 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Graham%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:19%20AM> Report this comment The reason we got sympathy was Europe thought that we, like them, would be terrified. Instead, we got pissed off, and decided to do something about it. Posted by Russ on September 12, 2006 6:17 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Russ%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:17%20AM> Report this comment Thanks for the insightful comments. Good article. -Bob Atlanta, Georgia, USA Posted by <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/exit.jhtml?exit=http://www.flickr.com/photo s/manuel_override/> Bob Tolford on September 12, 2006 6:11 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Bob%20Tolford%20-%20September%2012,%202006%206:11% 20AM> Report this comment Like most folk I think the events of 9/11 where terrible, America seems to think its all about democracy and freedom, and not about America's foreign policies. I don't think the so called militants could care less what happens in America or anywhere in the west for that matter. They only care about what happens at home, the west's refusal to have any sort of dialogue with terrorists (Who are patriots at home), will only end in more tears for ordinary people. Posted by Guy Middlewood on September 12, 2006 5:48 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Guy%20Middlewood%20-%20September%2012,%202006%205: 48%20AM> Report this comment Anne Appelbaum paints her personal picture of how the world should look, with a touching sensitivity. She even writes as if Bush has some legitimacy and authority in world affairs. The plain fact is that the idea of trying to mould the world in the American image of democracy, is futile and doomed to failure. We do not wish to look or live or think or even walk like Bush - the one man who is ridiculed in half the world and hated in the other half. Posted by Colin Dale on September 12, 2006 5:47 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Colin%20Dale%20-%20September%2012,%202006%205:47%2 0AM> Report this comment Ahh Poor America, nobody loves us! what a load of bullsh*t! - it's a different story now it's the so called "rag heads" to when it was the blue eyed, blond haired Irish man, singing "Danny Boy"! and he was being supported by America in his so called "armed struggle". Is it any wonder that people in the UK are glad to see you getting some pay back, christ knows we lost enough people over the years, their deaths paid for by "dumb Irish Anericans". Yes, the world hates you and is it no wonder why? With your arrogance, your attitude towards the rest of the world, your sheer ignorance in the way that people live, but also the fact that you leave yourself's open to much self abuse! How can you "preach the rule of law" and then try to hold yourself above it!!!! God almighty, if you want to be the so called "New Empire" then for god's sake at least act the part, get your act together and live your life the way you want the rest of to live! - NOT preach one thing and live another. Posted by Rob on September 12, 2006 5:46 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Rob%20-%20September%2012,%202006%205:46%20AM> Report this comment Oh please, another American who feels that we should all be sooo sympathetic. The Americans are not the only ones who have lost loved ones to terrorism. I have the strangest feeling that the Americans, yet again, thought that they would arrive at a war late, help to turn the tide and come home as heroes. Well I am sorry to say that America has created this problem. It was a lack of foresight at the end of the cold war. America did not perceive the consequences of its post cold war "we are best and you must copy us" attitude. An attitude that may well have been right then but since, has created most of the current problems. Please, let's stop this "War on terrorism". Why not try and put right our past mistakes and help these people to progress up the economic ladder. I find that people who worry about their mortgage are less inclined to wonder about martyrdom. Posted by Damian Thomson on September 12, 2006 5:31 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Damian%20Thomson%20-%20September%2012,%202006%205: 31%20AM> Report this comment As an American, I'm shocked to feel the virulent hatred from the various forums - and it seems that the strongest is from the British. September 11th happened before Iraq, there were terrorist events before September 11th, there have been terrorists in countries opposed to the war in Iraq. I won't even go into the anti-semitism. I didn't realize before what "haters" the British were. Posted by Alsion on September 12, 2006 5:31 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Alsion%20-%20September%2012,%202006%205:31%20AM> Report this comment There is no particular reason to expect the U.S. to remain on good terms with her "traditional allies" in Europe. The post-WWII order as it existed through the end of the Cold War was an anomaly. For most of American history - from the Colonial period until 1945 - the US was often at odds with one or several European powers. What we're seeing now, whether one blames the wild-eyed neo-cons or the cheese-eating surrender monkeys, is simply a return to that earlier status quo. It is inevitable. My father, a man in his 70s, grew up assuming that Europe and the U.S. would be more or less on the same side of most questions. I am in my 30s now, and I take it for granted that when I am his age, Europe and the U.S. will be on opposite sides of nearly every important question. I accept this, as most Americans must come to accept it. Besides, the fact is that Europe is already full of radical Islamists. They are part of the European polity and will only grow in power and importance. Europe can't be expected to combat radical Islam -- Europe is now a seat of radical Islam. Posted by <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/exit.jhtml?exit=http://www.psyfin.com> John Klein on September 12, 2006 5:10 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20John%20Klein%20-%20September%2012,%202006%205:10%2 0AM> Report this comment Europe, inclusive of GB, will pay a huge price for letting its inferiority complex regarding the US preclude an aggressive response to islamic facism breeding unhindered and unchallenged in its inner cities and ethnic suburbs. It is not George Bush's nor America's responsibility to build coalitions of support against an enemy that Europe fails, or worse, refuses to recognise. Calling the GWOT something else will not forestall nor prevent more dead Brits on the Tube if your leadership has not the backbone to stand with the US or the stomach to stand alone. Posted by TBone on September 12, 2006 4:04 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20TBone%20-%20September%2012,%202006%204:04%20AM> Report this comment Heartfelt, I dare say, but out of touch with reality, the author has failed to see how the anathema towards America has built over decades: they ignored (even supported) the British fight against the IRA, and as for the other European terrorist organisations of the 70s - well, Bush wouldn't know, would he? Furthermore, the US has, under Bush Jr in particular, demonstrated unutterably how oil is the reason for action - why aren't American voices raised against the appalling injustices in Zimbabwe? (No oil, stupid!) As for the "War on Terror" - that logo on US TV incenses me, for all the reasons mentioned, and because it means nothing. When will the US seriously start to try to understand why so many people hate them, and why most of us Brits look at them with disdain? Until they start to educate and inform their own people (who are woefully ignorant of what is happening outside the USA), there will be no hope of a major shift in opinion. I am personally sick of the logo, of the President and the whingeing. And as for Tony Blair and his subservience towards a man of such limited intelligence, education and ability? Words fail me... Posted by Sharmian Niel on September 12, 2006 3:59 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Sharmian%20Niel%20-%20September%2012,%202006%203:5 9%20AM> Report this comment Stop blaming US/Clinton et al and the British/Blair et al for our war crime Kosovo war? (App. B/Rambouillet) Why not blame Bush et al and Blair for their/OUR war crimes in the Iraq war and occupation? Only the East is guilty? Ms Appelbaum's irresponsible mentality is exactly what got us into this MESS. Clinton, Bush, and Blair and their gangs should be brought to Truth and Justice, while the West may still have some chance of recouping the East's respect. Only when we accept justice ourselves do we have the right to see/demand it be done to others. Posted by <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/core/exit.jhtml?exit=http://LCoat.tripod.com> Lou Coatney (1st Alamein) on September 12, 2006 3:50 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20Lou%20Coatney%20(1st%20Alamein)%20-%20September%20 12,%202006%203:50%20AM> Report this comment Yes, it used to be called "War for Peace" in the USSR. Posted by lil on September 12, 2006 3:39 AM <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:%20xml=/opinio n/2006/09/12/do1202.xml%20lil%20-%20September%2012,%202006%203:39%20AM> Report this comment The only continent lagging behind after September 11 2001 is Europe. I believe that military intervention is but one tool in a large array of different options the west can draw on to stem and defeat terrorism. Perhaps the most valuable tool in this fight is 'good old fashioned police and intelligence work'. There is however, a fly in the ointment; The EU, with its inability to act, its endless beaucracy, its thinly veiled anti-Americanism, represents a dangerous obstacle to global police and intelligence co-operation against terrorism and thus the security and wellbeing of the citizens of the EU. Posted by Ash on September 12, 2006 3:12 AM [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] -------------------------- Want to discuss this topic? Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------- Brooks Isoldi, editor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.intellnet.org Post message: osint@yahoogroups.com Subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
