Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Real terrorism

Everyone has managed to keep a typical British sense of proportion about the recent failed car bomb attacks in London and Glasgow. Most people have gone about their business and leisure as usual, refusing to be intimidated by the terrorists. The attack in Glasgow had an added element of surprise, people expect such things to happen in London not North of the Border. Still, it gave the Scots an opportunity to demonstrate their grit. It was interesting to listen to the interviews with eye-witnesses, their outrage was against the attack on the policeman by one of the terrorists not at the attempt to bomb the airport.

In the days since the Glasgow incident, though, I have sensed a change in the mood of the people to whom I've spoken. There is something deeply shocking and disturbing about doctors being terrorists. These are people who have supposedly dedicated themselves to saving lives. They are intelligent and well-educated, not vulnerable youngsters preyed upon by fanatics. The fear and suspicion that have been aroused could prove far more damaging than the deaths and injuries of 7/7.


  1. As doctors they're probably given more latitude to come and go without scrutiny. I stopped seeing Arab/Moslem physicians well before the current unpleasantries because of their not to be believed rudeness towards women.

    It happened again only last week, when I went with my husband to a specialist who had trained in a Moslem country and who was so obnoxious, my husband flipped and switched over to one of his colleagues.

    I'm sorry for those who aren't terrorists, but until the majority of Moslems speak out loudly condemning their murdering co-religionists, I will err on the side of caution and treat each and every one of them as a potential terrorist.

  2. I understand your view, erp,and I am sure many people in Britain will begin to feel that way. I see that as a victory for terrorism, though. Once trust between people is destroyed, there is little hope for peace and things can only get worse.

  3. This isn't trust vs. paranoia. It's about dealing with reality. Your media, as I've read, has consistently refused to report that the unifying principle of these terrorist groups is their religious fanaticism and now I've read your new PM is following suit.

    This will only embolden more attempts to murder and mayhem and unless the non-terrorists in the Moslem community speak out forcefully and denounce and expose these activities especially if the leadership comes from the mosques, lose of trust will be the least of our worries.

    My reason for not patronizing Moslem physicians goes back many years before the overt terrorism of the modern day. It was made apparent to me, well before I, myself, reached that plateau, that women, especially those past their child bearing years, were useless and expendable and didn't merit their notice.

  4. I accept that your opinion is based upon personal experience but I've heard of very different experiences too and my mind remains open.

    You are mistaken about our press and the government; of course the link between religious fanaticism and terrorism is recognised but I hope that a distinction will always be drawn between fanatics and sincere adherents of every faith.

  5. Next time I come across an article about media reporting on terrorism, I'll send it along.

    I wonder how the patients of those doctors arrested for trying to blow up innocents on the street feel about their health care.

    Have any of them been interviewed?

  6. Actually a woman who had been a patient of one of the drivers of the jeep in Glasgow, said that he had been most caring and conscientious towards her. It is all beyond comprehension.

  7. Well, erp, I think we must agree to differ. I must challenge this bit from your comment, though:

    "notice how differently Moslem terrorists are treated as compared to IRA terrorists. I never noticed that the media went to IRA leaders for comments"

    The Muslim Council of Britain is a respected, legitimate body which represents the interests of British citizens who are Muslim. Any comparison with the IRA is outrageous.

  8. Doesn't the IRA represent the interests of British citizens as well, i.e., Catholics living in Northern Ireland.

  9. No,erp, the IRA, known as the Provos, was a terrorist organisation.

  10. Erp, you are correct in saying that the doctors were less scrutinized than other immigrants. Apparently that is why Al Quaeda recruited doctors to be part of this terror conspiracy. They are always looking for the weak points in the defenses.

  11. Duck:

    This is why I think the whole situation has changed in the public psyche. Terrorists are supposed to be easily recognised fanatics or vulnerable young men recruited by evil leaders. The idea that intelligent, educated people would become suicide bombers is alien to us, but apparently not to the security forces, who seem to have been aware of some of this particular group.

    An additional horror is the knowledge that doctors, who profess to care about relieving pain and suffering, would plan to kill innocent by-standers.

    That is why I say the terroism is now real. The actual bombs didn't harm anyone but the terrorists themselves. If they had been the 'usual' kind of fanatics, we would just think they were pretty bad at their jobs and our security forces were on top of the situation. Now we will suspect anyone and everyone and perfectly innocent communities will be disrupted - so, in a way, the terrorists have gained an advantage.


I love to read your comments and promise that I will reply as soon as I can leave my garden, sewing room or kitchen!