July 14, 2005 by AK

And so they did achieve something

Decency required silence; now let honesty get ugly. I was scared on 9/11 — what if it were a WWIII or IV or some kind of Armageddon beginning? When Moscow lived through several terrorist attacks — I grieved and asked for vengeance. But I’ve grown indifferent since. I have a petty heart and can’t help it; only a series of shots or pints can revive my faculty of compassion now.

My mind was in the Tube, imagining how its tunnels’ walls felt to survivors’ fingers, knowing there was a fundamental similarity between the people under the soil of London and of Moscow. But the first thing I thought after the news broke was, “Now Blair will have his way with national IDs.” And of course it’s terribly depressing to think of ID cards in Britain — “your cradle, your home, and your bier,” Liberty?

Her Majesty’s Government will no doubt make sure new “anti-terrorist” laws are drafted and applied on the basis of total and absolute equality. An equal piece of everyone’s freedom must be taken away! Liberty can take a flogging, no problem; but equality’s untouchable. There seems to be a way to preserve the liberty of 90% by diminishing the liberties of the other 10%. The nation would still remain much freer than under any scheme Blair, or any mainstream politician, can come up with.


  1. J.Cassian says:

    Yes, it’s great. Just like being back in school when the teacher inflicts punishment on the whole class because he’s too lazy to look for the real culprits. Plus there’s no way anybody’s going to be able to forge an ID card, is there?

    Arguably worse is the proposed Religious Hatred Bill intended to crack down on “Islamophobia”, no doubt including any attempt to make the Muslim religion and its adherents undergo critical scrutiny. I don’t know about phobia but I’m beginning to suffer Islamo-eczema. I’m annoyed with the “community leaders'” kneejerk self-pity, concern for carefully selected “grievances” (vocal about Palestine, silent about Sudan) and denial they bear the slightest responsibility for tolerating fanatics within their own culture. If they can take to the streets to burn Salman Rushdie in effigy, they can take to the streets to burn a puppet of Osama bin Laden. That might go some way to reassuring me.

  2. well we are all sorry about people dying from terror no matter which coutnry they live in and who kills them. But it is also known that terror can be used to force on one’s political goals, example? here you are:

    “Politeness in the photocopier queue is why we’re losing the War on Terror”, in:


  3. Michael B says:

    Especially frustrating given coopting aspects of nation/states within dar al Harb is an acknowledged program in their overall set of strategies. See this monograph, published last year (pdf).

  4. ellie says:

    The London terrorists were apparently native-born British citizens, one of whom was enthnicly Jamaican. Are you suggesting that restrictions should be legislated based on ancestral-ethnic origins and/or religious affiliation? That’ll never happen in the US for sure, and, I assume, the UK as well. As for ID cards, as citizens of the UK, the bombers would have been covered.

  5. Alex(ei) says:

    ellie, I’m not suggesting limiting anybody’s rights — it’s not my business anyway — still I think the UK government would use its resources more efficiently if placed people of certain ancestry under special scrutiny regardless of their legal status. Unlike religious affiliation, one’s ancestry can be defined in clear terms. That would be unfair to most people of, say, Pakistani descent but to do otherwise would be unfair to pretty much every Briton.

    Regarding IDs, something tells me this time they won’t go away like they did after WWII (not without some difficulty either though).

Leave a Reply


Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 11 other subscribers

%d bloggers like this: