is this country going a bit overboard in responding to the attacks?

[TeeJay]

Because the British army isn't there.

I was responding to this:
"Yeah, seems that our lives are worth more somehow. I'm sure that many Londoners who were outraged by the London bombings didn't think once about the amount of Iraqis (and others) who die due to being bombed."

Why shouldn't be people care about human lives and be outraged, wherever it happens? British troops didn't bomb the tube - people died - Londoners are outraged...

...if it all comes down to innocent people losing their lives and not having double standards then we should have been concerned about Sudan, DRC and Algeria. If however you just want to bang and bang a tired old "anti-imperialist" gong then I can see why you'd ignore certain places and fetishise others.

 

[Cloo]

The thing is, in Western societies, we go to great lengths to put as much distance between ourselves and death as possible. In countries where war, disease and child mortality are daily realities, they can’t do that and we have difficulty in relating to such people. We have incredible difficulty facing it when it does come, especially in numbers.

We like to say we love life, but I think more than that a lot of us are simply terrified of death above all things. This is how certain fanatics put the fear into Western society – by appearing not to fear death.

It is a very hard thing for our ‘death free’ society to cope with the threat or nearness of death and we need to get better at facing the idea of mortality.

 

[Sorry.]

I'm with the whole "blame the media" thing. No one at work has mentioned it at all, even when it comes on the radio. In fact they were far busier asking me if I'd gone to the G8.

Most people have thought some sort of attack was a matter of time for years and probably aren't dwelling on it, especially outside London.

Mind you, there was a poll saying 90% of Brits wanted stronger terror laws now

 

[redsquirrel]

Why shouldn't be people care about human lives and be outraged, wherever it happens? British troops didn't bomb the tube - people died - Londoners are outraged...

...if it all comes down to innocent people losing their lives and not having double standards then we should have been concerned about Sudan, DRC and Algeria. If however you just want to bang and bang a tired old "anti-imperialist" gong then I can see why you'd ignore certain places and fetishise others.

Bullshit. In one case we're responsible for many of the deaths in the others it's not the British military killing people. The situtation with Iraq is quite clearly different to that of Sudan, Tibet, DRC, wherever.

 

[Giles]

Funny how we don't have a Europe wide two minute silence every time 57 Iraqis die in a bombing.

Don't be ridiculous! We'd never get anything done!

Giles..

 

[TeeJay]

I mean the situation. Here. He has allowed these fucking bastard religious fanatics to preach evil here, in our country, twisting the minds of the young and vulnerable. They should have been nicked straight away and kicked the fuck out. To where I don't know.

You are saying that Tony Blair has blood on his hands because he has not locked up a small number of headcases to talk shite in London? Most people are complaining that his government has been too authoritarian and oppressive with their new anti-terrorist legislation and powers. Others are complaining about the new laws on "religious hatred".

Al Qaeda (and 'affilitates') have attacked in Saudi Arabia, in Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Indonesia, Kenya, Tanzania, France, Pakistan... and so on. Some of these countries have very strict rules and no 'freedom of speech'. It is not clear that this helped them avoid attack.

People can see materials and lectures on the internet. They can travel abroad for training and study. I dont think there is much evidence that the UK being 'liberal' has increased the chances of London being attacked. Up until recently many people said the opposite: that London was not attacked precisely because so many Muslim and Middle Eastern groups, refugees, dissidents and opposition groups were based there. It probably doesn't make any difference either way in fact.

 

[Hollis]

Yep - I agree with Pickman's - way over the top. There was a letter in the Independent today complaining about the sensationalist coverage with numerous reports from casualties and near-misses. There comes a point where you wonder what the motives are behind it all.

And I can remember living in London when the IRA bombing campaign was on-going, and the reporting was nothing like this.

 

[TeeJay]

We like to say we love life, but I think more than that a lot of us are simply terrified of death above all things. This is how certain fanatics put the fear into Western society – by appearing not to fear death.

The UK has just as many people prepared to die - be they soldiers, emergency workers or even aid workers - as Muslim countries. None wants to die but many people face the risk of being killed as part of their jobs. In WW2 many bomber crews knew that they were going on virtual suicide missions as did soldiers and agents sent on high risk missions. They weren't called suicide missions but the odds were such that many in effect were.

 

[frogwoman]

It's funny but I read on the BBC yesterday an article about how a bomb was defused at a Northern Ireland police station, however it was tiny and appeared at the bottom of the page about NI. There have been many such bombs recently, for a long time before the attacks, which were planted in NI but haven't gone off but could have had the potential to kill someone. Thank gd they haven't.

 

[poster342002]

If the BBC and others didn't indulge it I am sure the general public would just go about things in its usual low-key way. Last Thursday I met up with my scuba club for our weekly piss-up and not a single person was talking about it.

I agree (and with Fridgemagnet). There's a sense of this being cranked up.

 

[TeeJay]

Bullshit. In one case we're responsible for many of the deaths in the others it's not the British military killing people. The situtation with Iraq is quite clearly different to that of Sudan, Tibet, DRC, wherever.

Amnesty International doesn't cherry pick countries. Oxfam doesn't cherry-pick countries. The UN doesn't cherry-pick countries.

The original post was talking about having a minutes silence for 57 dead human beings - none killed by British troops - and asked why we don't do these for others killed overseas. Its up to you if you choose to ignore millions of people dying in Africa. I will draw my own conclusions about what is motivationg you and more importantly what doesn't.

 

[shoddysolutions]

For londoners I can understand the interest, because there must be a real sense that it could have been them. In fact, I was in London last Thursday for an interview, so it could have been me, and I found myself poring over the details of the attacks for a couple of days afterwards.

I do feel that the media are milking it, especially on the 'human interest' side, about the 'brave' victims and their 'courageous' rescuers. I say leave all these people to recover and get on with their lives.

I also wish the media could focus instead on analysing the why as well as the how. I no longer need to know where and when the bombs went off, but I would like to know why.

 

[LJo]

If there is a vigil on Thursday I will go down and stand there quietly because I have demonstrated against fascism and war in the past, and I don't see why I shouldn't demonstrate against terrorism.

I will not be wailing, gnashing my teeth, or covering myself in sackcloth and ashes. Nobody else I know will be doing that either. Before and after the vigil I will be getting on with normal stuff.

 

[redrouge]

I can only smirk at how London has been re-branded as a tolerant cultural melting pot where we're all living together in harmony and welcoming strangers to our city. It only took me till Monday morning to get me first tut for hesitating ever so slightly on the pavement. Don't get me wrong, I think the place is smart and wouldn't change it for anything but I barely recognise the picture we are painting of the place.

 

[magneze]

I can only smirk at how London has been re-branded as a tolerant cultural melting pot where we're all living together in harmony and welcoming strangers to our city. It only took me till Monday morning to get me first tut for hesitating ever so slightly on the pavement. Don't get me wrong, I think the place is smart and wouldn't change it for anything but I barely recognise the picture we are painting of the place.

Are you basing all that on one "tut"?

 

[redrouge]

No...on many such tuts I have received over the years.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

I mean the situation. Here. He has allowed these fucking bastard religious fanatics to preach evil here, in our country, twisting the minds of the young and vulnerable. They should have been nicked straight away and kicked the fuck out. To where I don't know.

Stobart, you're an intolerant idiot.

 

[J77]

Stobart, you're an intolerant idiot.

^^ The FeMail persona has returned...

 

[XerxesVargas]

I don't find it OTT to be honest. When you compare it to the aftermath of the Spanish bomb blasts and the aftermath of 11/9 then it seems fairly restrained. British people tend to be reserved and not prone to public shows of emotion. Therefore they need it to be organised for them.

If you combine that with the fact that the news has come out much more slowly than in other countries after the attacks, which fuels media speculation, then I'm not too surprised.

I dont really see this reaction that most on here are talking about.

 

[Hollis]

It only took me till Monday morning to get me first tut for hesitating ever so slightly on the pavement.

You should thank yourself for getting off lightly.. I'd only been outside my house 2 minutes this morning and I'd some random "trackie" bloke shouting down the street that I was a fucking cunt.

 

[redrouge]

I think War on Britain and Target London is a bit sensationalist.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

There's some pertinent letters here - I strongly agree with the third one.

Can we please stop hearing about the resilience of the British people? People everywhere are resilient. Londoners went back on the tube on Friday because they have to, they have jobs to go to etc. People do not have a choice but to get on with life. At least in London we still have an infrastructure which allows us to do this, unlike survivors of the tsunami, or the residents of Baghdad who have shown tremendous resilience in rebuilding their lives.

Desna Roberts
London

 

[Sorry.]

You should thank yourself for getting off lightly.. I'd only been outside my house 2 minutes this morning and I'd some random "trackie" bloke shouting down the street that I was a fucking cunt.

why?

 

[Orang Utan]

why?

Cos he is

 

[redrouge]

You should thank yourself for getting off lightly.. I'd only been outside my house 2 minutes this morning and I'd some random "trackie" bloke shouting down the street that I was a fucking cunt.

I got me own back with a sharp tsk tsk though.

 

[Hollis]

No reason at all! I think he was pissed or on-something. Fortunately I figured he was wired, so crossed to the other side of the road.

 

[Sorry.]

There's some pertinent letters here - I strongly agree with the third one.[/i]

You seem to have missed one of the most telling examples of online reactions (Defiance on the web, July 11). Livejournal.com is not a "community forum for London", but a host for web journals for people round the world. One well-meaning American decided to start a "London hurts" community to allow people in other countries to share their thoughts: hence the slogan "Today, I'm a Londoner and today I hurt". But this was abruptly derailed when the community was discovered by actual Londoners, who proceeded to mercilessly satirise it with a succession of spoof images such as "Today, I am a Londoner, and I got a day off".
Clare Sainsbury
London

 

[redrouge]

I am disgusted at the sentiment that people in London should carry on as normal, browbeating workers into their jobs under the guise of stiff upper lip. I was due to travel to London for work this week but will not do so. This is not to send out a message to the terrorists that they have frightened me into submission, it is because I do not want to. I have been unnerved and unsettled by these events and I would be uncomfortable travelling in London. After such events this is a reasonable sentiment and I would be appalled if my employer did not accept this. In my opinion this encouragement to "carry on" and show the terrorists that we can't be beaten is a thinly veiled excuse to protect big business.
Emily Greenaway
Gateshead

It's alright for Emily to say that, she was telling her boss that she wasn't going to a meeting or conference or interview. Imagine us working here though..."alright there boss, it's me. No, nope, no can do today. Why? I'm scared of bombs and I'm not coming in."

I know what would happen to me, I'd be out on me arse...we don't have a choice about it and that doesn't mean I have been brow beaten into submission it's just how it is.

 

[Orang Utan]

Emily is a chickenshit - sack her!

 

[redrouge]

I thought Geordies were meant to be hard? Even the women up there. And to think she actually went out of her way to tell everybody.