NationStates Jolt Archive


The Mayor of London speaks.

Bushrepublican liars
31-07-2005, 03:47
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1658982005



Outrage as Livingstone tries to 'explain' suicide bombers

FRASER NELSON
POLITICAL EDITOR

Key points
• Ken Livingstone claims terrorist attacks fuelled by UK foreign policy
• Public expression of these views breaks political truce since attacks
• His views shared by Labour back-benchers and many members of public

Key quote
"You've just had 80 years of western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the western need for oil. We've propped up unsavoury governments, we've overthrown ones we didn't consider sympathetic" - KEN LIVINGSTON, SPEAKING ON RADIO 4

Story in full KEN Livingstone, the mayor of London, yesterday stunned even his political opponents by claiming the terrorist attacks on the city a fortnight ago were motivated by British foreign policy in the Middle East.

Shattering the political truce that had emerged since the four bomb attacks, Mr Livingstone said resentment was being fuelled as a result of the treatment of detainees by United States troops at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. He went so far as to suggest the English public would themselves resort to suicide bombings if placed under certain circumstances.

While his remarks were condemned by politicians and diplomats, they echoed private criticism among Tony Blair's enemies on Labour's back-benches.

When asked what he thought had motivated the four suicide bombers who struck in London on 7 July, Mr Livingstone traced it back to Britain's historic role in the Middle East.

"You've just had 80 years of western intervention into predominantly Arab lands because of the western need for oil. We've propped up unsavoury governments, we've overthrown ones we didn't consider sympathetic," he told Radio 4.

"In the 1980s, Americans recruited and trained Osama bin Laden, taught him how to kill, to make bombs, and set him off to kill the Russians and drive them out of Afghanistan."

The United States, he said, was reaping its own harvest as "they didn't give any thought to the fact that, once he'd done that, [bin Laden] might turn on his creators".

He was careful to say that his criticism of British and US foreign policy did not amount to sympathy for the bombers. "I do not support any suicide bombings. I don't ever recall supporting an act of violence," he said. But he made it clear that he regarded suicide attacks as the natural result of political decisions. "Under foreign occupation and denied the right to vote, denied the right to run your own affairs, often denied the right to work for three generations, I suspect that if it had happened here in England, we would have produced a lot of suicide bombers ourselves.

"A lot of young people see the double standards; they see what happens in Guantanamo Bay, and they just think that there isn't a just foreign policy."

The rise of Islamic extremism across the world was, he said, the product of British policy to maintain a presence in the Arab world after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

"I have not the slightest doubt that if, at the end of the First World War, we had done what we promised the Arabs, which was to let them be free and have their own governments, and kept out of Arab affairs, and just bought their oil, rather than feeling we had to control the flow of oil, I suspect this wouldn't have arisen," he said.

While Mr Livingstone has voiced such concerns before, his views were thought to have moderated since he was accepted back into the Labour Party last year.

Downing Street was taken aback by Mr Livingstone's outspoken remarks - but No 10 did not criticise him, praising his performance in the aftermath of the attacks a fortnight ago.

"The Prime Minister and Ken Livingstone have different views of the world and that remains the case," said a spokesman.

"Equally, however, we recognise that Ken Livingstone has provided, as an elected official in London, a lead to the people of London at this tragic time - at the same time as he expresses views which we fundamentally disagree with."

However, Zvi Heifetz, Israeli's ambassador to London issued a furious and biased statement. "It is outrageous that the same mayor who rightfully condemned the suicide bombing in London as 'perverted faith', defends those who, under the same extremist banner, kill Israelis," he said.

David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said he denounced any attempt to empathise with the suicide bombers - whether from Mr Livingstone or Islamic clerics.

But the mayor's comments reflected the views of some Labour rebels, who have so far refrained from using the bombings to attack the Prime Minister in the House of Commons.

"After a few weeks, it will be hard to conclude that Britain is not at more risk because of the war the Prime Minister led Britain into," one MP said yesterday. "And it will be hard not to conclude that he bears some of the blame."

There is increasing evidence that the British public link the London attacks with the Iraq war. An ICM opinion poll two days ago showed that two-thirds believe Mr Blair bears some responsibility for the terrorist attacks on the capital.

The Prime Minister has vigorously rejected any such suggestion - and he reminded the Commons yesterday that 26 countries had faced attacks by al-Qaeda.

Mr Livingstone, re-elected as the official Labour candidate to be London mayor last summer, is combining his criticism of British foreign policy with a robust line on anti-terrorism laws. He said yesterday he had "no problem at all" with plans to ban the "glorification of terrorism".

He has also echoed Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, in saying that concerns about civil liberties must be put into this context. "A pretty important civil right is the civil right not to be blown up on the way to work," he said yesterday.
Sabbatis
31-07-2005, 06:16
Sounds like a desperate politician. That's up to the people of London to decide, of course.
Bushrepublican liars
01-08-2005, 15:44
Sounds like a desperate politician. That's up to the people of London to decide, of course.

Sounds like a courageous and intelligent men, the oposite of those who are uncritical on B&B (Bush and Blair) that used lies (remember the WMD lie) to start a war. He is bTW the most popular mayor that the Londonians ever had.
Unionista
01-08-2005, 15:52
Sounds like a courageous and intelligent men, the oposite of those who are uncritical on B&B (Bush and Blair) that used lies (remember the WMD lie) to start a war. He is bTW the most popular mayor that the Londonians ever had.

Ah well, that's Technically entirely true, however he's the first mayor london has ever had as well, so it makes his time at the top of the poll of most popular london mayors akin to a poll of most popular presidents called Reagan.
Kryysakan
01-08-2005, 15:58
Ken's right, and he had the guts to say it. Understanding motives is not the same as legitimising barbaric acts. The moment you say 'I can't understand how they could've done this' you've lost the ability to end the conflict.
As a Londoner, I deplore the attacks and feel a good measure of hatred towards the individuals responsible. At the same time, denying that Blair put us in the firing line is denying the obvious. I'll be proved wrong the day Switzerland gets suicide-bombed.
Bushrepublican liars
01-08-2005, 16:19
. I'll be proved wrong the day Switzerland gets suicide-bombed.

That is indeed a good comparision, I am not from London (neither UK) but friend of mine is a 39 year old women, flying producer. Normally she votes conservative but in London she found Ken the only guy with a vision a a great city. He certainly has done a lot, when I visited the city last time I saw his traffic plan in action and saw a much more viable city with less cars on the street. That was just on thing that everybody sees when you come out Waterloo Station.
He made the only possible explanation about the cause of the bombing and that "new" terrorisme for London ("new", I mean not linked to Ireland).Both BB's are responsable as well as the history of the west in the midlle east. (blind and uncritical for the situation in Palestine).
Dobbsworld
01-08-2005, 16:28
However, Zvi Heifetz, Israeli's ambassador to London issued a furious and biased statement. "It is outrageous that the same mayor who rightfully condemned the suicide bombing in London as 'perverted faith', defends those who, under the same extremist banner, kill Israelis," he said.
Like Israel's ambassador has anything to weigh in with, here. 'Cause eeeeeeverything's about Israel. Way to go, Zvi.Ken's right, and he had the guts to say it. Understanding motives is not the same as legitimising barbaric acts. The moment you say 'I can't understand how they could've done this' you've lost the ability to end the conflict.
As a Londoner, I deplore the attacks and feel a good measure of hatred towards the individuals responsible. At the same time, denying that Blair put us in the firing line is denying the obvious. I'll be proved wrong the day Switzerland gets suicide-bombed.So what is it that Bush has had on Blair to go along with such a poorly-conceived plan(plan?) based on such tenuous(untruthful) information(bullshit)?
Wurzelmania
01-08-2005, 16:47
Good on Ken.

Eventually the bullshit will drown Blair.

Anyone surprised by Israel shoving their oar in? Sooner or later they'll catch a crab :D
Dobbsworld
01-08-2005, 16:59
Anyone surprised by Israel shoving their oar in? Sooner or later they'll catch a crab :D
No surprise whatsoever. None at all.
The Holy Womble
01-08-2005, 17:39
Anyone surprised by Israel shoving their oar in? Sooner or later they'll catch a crab :D
I'll let you in on a secret: the New Scotsmen is simply bullshitting you. They have carefully omitted every single word he said regarding Israel- and he did say a whole friggin lot (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1121796127415&p=1078113566627). Notice the article dates, they match. Of course, while forgetting what Red Ken said, they still plugged in Israeli ambassador's reaction, giving the likes of you a false impression that Israel "shoved their oar in" for no reason.

Quoting Melanie Philips, one of my favorite British journalists and bloggers, if the British want to deal with the root causes of terrorism, their first step should be kicking Ken Living Brickhead (or was it stone?) out of any position of significance.
Wurzelmania
01-08-2005, 17:48
Ah yes, let's kick the only politician with morals and a view that includes reality out! Typical of the Daily Mail really.

Right-wing rags are not a news source mate.
The Holy Womble
01-08-2005, 17:54
Ah yes, let's kick the only politician with morals and a view that includes reality out!
Reality? Red Ken has long forgotten where that place is. He was, I believe kicked out of his own party at some point, its a shame Blair brought him back.


Typical of the Daily Mail really.

Right-wing rags are not a news source mate.
Well, the Daily Mail, to my knowlege, is less of a rag than New Scotsman- and at least it is not infested with Hizb ut-Tahrir inflitrators like the Guardian is.
Wurzelmania
01-08-2005, 17:56
Reality? Red Ken has long forgotten where that place is. He was, I believe kicked out of his own party at some point, its a shame Blair brought him back.

Disobeyed the boss a few times too many it's true. Not kissing the leaders ass is a terrible character flaw.
The Holy Womble
01-08-2005, 17:59
Disobeyed the boss a few times too many it's true. Not kissing the leaders ass is a terrible character flaw.
If he chooses to kiss the terrorist ass instead- damn right it is.
Ianarabia
01-08-2005, 18:10
I think the remarks are well informed and I think well timed. I believe he is right...after all like someon sadi here when Switzerland gets bombed.
Drunk commies deleted
01-08-2005, 18:19
I think the remarks are well informed and I think well timed. I believe he is right...after all like someon sadi here when Switzerland gets bombed.
Ok, Switzerland didn't get bombed, but Indonesia and the Philipines have dealt with bombings and shootings by Al Quaeda connected organizations like Jemah Islamia and Moro Islamic Liberation Front for many years now. One Al Quaeda terrorist was based in Manilla and was working on a plan to blow up passenger aircraft throughout southeast asia.

Just because Switzerland hasn't been bombed doesn't mean that Al Quaeda is a benign organization that has no intentions to harm any nation that isn't involved in Afghanistan or Iraq. Anyone who thinks that you can reason with or bargain with Al Quaeda and similar Islamist terror groups is incredibly naive.