Newsgroup: it.sesso.discussioni
Titolo: London 1 - Al Qaeda 0

In Monty Python and the Holy Grail King Arthur confronts a black knight, 
who challenges him to a duel. Arthur lops off one of his opponent's arms, 
but the black knight keeps taunting him. "Snick!" There goes the other 
arm, then one leg and then another, until the knight is reduced to a mere 
trunk, with blood spurting in all directions. But still he doesn't give 
up. "Come on then, you coward, do your worst!" he shouts.  Funny thing, 
defiance.
Any admiration for Londoners, though, was as nothing compared with the 
adulation Londoners - egged on by the media - heaped on themselves. 
Everything, from the spirit of the Blitz to the inherent strength of the 
multicultural community, was trotted out, as if to suggest that, far from 
a city being hit without warning by an invisible enemy we had actually 
witnessed a major victory over the terrorists. "London 1 - Al Qaeda 0" 
said one headline. What?
Prime Minister Tony Blair helped by telling us on the one hand that the 
sole purpose of these evil men is to maim and kill (in the absence of a 
serious political agenda) and, on the other, claiming that the terrorists 
will never succeed.
For men who want to maim and kill - and nothing else - they'd just 
succeeded remarkably well. Nor could the WTC, Bali and Madrid be 
classified as dismal failures, from a maiming and killing point of view.
The Blairs and Bushes of this world are in a bit of a cleft stick over 
terrorism. Unwilling to admit that there are political motives behind the 
attacks (opposition to American world dominance, to its friendly 
relations with undemocratic but oil-rich regimes in the Middle East, to 
its unquestioning support of Israel and, more recently, to the wars 
against Afghanistan and Iraq) they have no other explanation to offer 
than the existence of groups of people who kill others - and frequently 
themselves - for the sheer hell of it. Not very persuasive - and that's 
why a new reason has been added to the mantra, "they hate our way of 
life".  Oh right.
So that's why I may in the near future be reduced to a mess on the 
pavement: they hate my way of life. They've never in my 44 years hated my 
way of life enough to blow me to bits, but now I'm told they do. Pull the 
other one, it's a con, designed to keep your public on side. A political 
motive behind terrorism would suggest that there is a political way to 
deal with it.
This Bush and Blair are not prepared to do. Much better to give people 
the idea that somehow not governments are the cause but the general 
public, the men and women in the street themselves. We're guilty, because 
of our way of life. There's nothing our leaders can or will do to protect 
us, so we must take it on the chin and raise our fists in defiance. "Come 
on you cowards! Do your worst! You won't get us down! We'll keep our way 
of life!"
The train and bus bombers could be reduced to helplessness, with 
laughter.
So now we wait to see whose way of life will next arouse the anger of 
evil men. Could it be the Italians, whose taste for extravagant shirts 
and artichokes alarms even non-Arabs? Or Denmark, where the Danish way of 
life - including a diet rich in raw eggs - is now being protected by the 
most Draconian immigration policy in Europe?
Or could it be the Netherlands, where our hateful predilections include 
cannabis, free sex, gay marriage, euthanasia, and salt-cured herring with 
onions and pickle? The same Netherlands where Islamic fundamentalism is 
currently on trial in the person of Mohammed Bouyeri, the killer of Theo 
van Gogh?
If the Dutch are due some punishment, they'll know it's their own fault, 
not their leaders. With innocent blood running down the gutter there's 
only one course of action. Be defiant, that'll teach these evil men.
-- 
http://www.tommoore.co.uk




nice one
the gov and media spin has been appalling
andrew

)
-- 
http://www.tommoore.co.uk