Disparity in the media.

Benjamin Disraeli said “Nothing can resist a human will that would stake its existence on its purpose”. Is it ever possible to stop someone who is prepared to do anything to achieve their aims? Of course not...so why are we trying to fight force with force? No matter what laws are brought in, how could there be any situation that would prevent somebody who is willing to do anything. What would be the sensible thing to do? The stick breaks, but the blade of grass bends. We need to bend lest we break. We can't change their reaction to what we do, but is there anything we could be doing differently? It is for our own advantage if we stop for a moment, examine the situation in its entirety and change it if we are not being completely even handed. If the cause of the action is removed, the action itself does not occur.  

"Blame" is the term used when the ego defends itself. The suicide bombers were to blame- it was their responsibility. They were response able...but what was it they were responding to? Is it “condoning their behaviour” to look for an explanation? Those who accuse others of condoning terrorism, being unpatriotic or unsympathetic, are usually the ones whose actions best explain why we were made a target.

How dare us be manipulated into considering we might have taken the wrong action; we are infallible.

They would like us to believe. We are neither perfect, nor immovable in our position, yet we don't seem to examine publicly why we are the target of extremists? 

Blair says it wasn’t because of Iraq, yet he can’t seem to provide adequate reason to what did cause it. We’ve asked moderate Muslims in the UK and they say of course it wasn’t Iraq. It wasn’t explained how a moderate could know what an extremist is thinking. If there is an acknowledged risk of radical clerics preaching hate leading to home grown suicide bombers...then is it not somebody's fault for not realising this earlier? It may be that simple and that obvious, yet it still doesn’t explain why someone is willing to encourage others to take these actions.  It’s not logical to suggest that they’d do it no matter what. Their legitimate grievance has been discredited by their vile, illegitimate actions, but we need to be smarter than this and face that which is hard to admit. Is it not tragic that they feel we are so deaf to their grievances that this is their only resort? 

To suggest that Muslims can do something about extremists is as stupid as suggesting the Irish Catholics can do something about the IRA, or Protestants do something about the UDF. Are Caucasians to be held accountable for the racists in their midst? Perhaps Muslims should wear ‘anti-suicide bomber’ wristbands to show support …much like the good folks of the UK did with their ‘anti-racism’ wristbands. Yeah. That would work. The terrorists certainly seem to hold us accountable for the actions of our government. Yet those elected take no share of the responsibility for how others react to their own chosen foreign policy. Blair grandstands; vowing to catch up with the bombers….then it is revealed they were suicide bombers and he is less keen on a trip to hell. A most frustrating turn of events, no revenge can be had. Is it justice that they died in the act?

 During the two weeks since the first attack, there has been blanket media coverage. Is the public to blame for this thirst for tragedy? Is the newspaper to blame for feeding the demand, or merely responding to the market forces? Somebody has to be responsible, as overexpose is tantamount to aiding and abetting. Not only is this free publicity for terrorists, it positively reinforces the idea that doing this sort of thing does get a reaction. The most picked on kid at school was usually the one who reacted the most when prodded. 

The highest selling product since reality TV.  Through the keyhole with Osama bin Laden. Who lives in a cave like this? Makeover special for OK magazine featuring Trinny, Susannah and Saddam Hussein - loose that beard Mr Grumpy. They'll hire Max Clifford for PR next before releasing a video of Osama Bin Laden doing Abby Tits-for-brains (likes it rough with bad guys), or perhaps the hook handed cleric  shagging Bolton Halliday-Innes with a hidden camera.

 It's normal for a paper to cover 'Home interests' first; however, didn't we make the situation in Iraq our business? It was our interest when 3 of 'our boys' died tragically. The insurgent terrorists underestimated the complete lack of compassion we have for Iraqis. They're wrong to think we would ever contemplate that our actions may be leading to the death of innocents abroad.  It’s our disowned problem which has caused this, but there’s nothing like a little terror to unite the people. Galvanised with resilience, defiance and determination...it's hardly the blitz, yet the media use words like ‘chaos’ when a train is delayed by a hoax. The opinion of the public skilfully moulded like thermoplastic, by propaganda. 

Don't we feel safe on this island? We’re not exposed to any mass insurgency. The ‘experts’ guess at what they don’t know; a terror ‘network’ or half a dozen fanatics? Fortress Britain is nearly impregnable, but what about our holiday resorts, foreign embassies, planes going home, ex-pats and interests abroad? The government would like us to realise how we're doing the best we can for other countries and will continue to do so. Look at what we’ve achieved for Africa in the last 20 years, and the lovely democracy that Iraq will shortly be enjoying courtesy of our unilateral policies. Don't worry about their casualties...it's a necessary side effect, besides which, at the end of the day- they're not British. When the fate of world is determined by the 8 richest countries in a meeting which is neither inclusive nor democratic; something is desperately wrong.