Some people are claiming that yesterday’s events refute the Power of Nightmares thesis – which is that Al Qaeda is an ideology, not an organised network, and that the neocon ideology and the Al Qaeda ideology feed off each other. These people are absolutely wrong: the attacks are strong evidence that The Power of Nightmares was correct.
The bombs were far too rubbish to be the work of a global terror network with any kind of supply chain: the terrorists didn’t even have any Semtex [*], hardly killed anyone (<100 people is rubbish if you’re aiming to maximise casualties), and didn’t cause any property damage. And the amount of collaboration and organisation required was negligible: "blow trains up around 9AM tomorrow. See ya".
It’s just about possible that there is a real, organised Al Qaeda cell in London planning a truly devastating atrocity, with money and supplies sent in by Bin Laden and his lieutenants. Unlikely, on the basis of the last four years’ events, but not completely impossible. If there is such a cell, it certainly wasn’t responsible for yesterday’s attacks.
[*] The bus bomb definitely didn’t contain Semtex – there was no crater in the road. The two subsurface train bombs are highly unlikely to have done. The Piccadilly line train may or may not have done.
True
B-BBC is truly a vile cesspit of blogging subhumanity. Please, John, stop linking there. I thought it would be tough to find anyone as nauseating as Galloway. B-BBC lowlife, droolingly eager to push their monomaniacal and hate-filled agenda, have somehow managed it. End of rant. I’d much rather talk about the bus theory anyway.
Nauseating – try LGF, which John also linked to yesterday, where the commenters openly espouse wiping out ‘the Muslims’.
Why the hell would I want to try LGF? And for dessert… Neverdock?
I don’t think that there’s enough evidence for the above assertions; nor do I think that the existence of a real and organised al Qaeda cell on the UK mainland would refute the "Power of Nightmares" thesis — a cell which was receiving detailed orders from mission control would, but that’s a separate possibility. It’s still possible that there is a larger, organised group who are husbanding their resources, perhaps sending out suicide bombers one at a time. Equally this might have been the worst that a single, small, poorly-equipped gang could manage. We simply don’t know yet, though some possibilities are more plausible than others.
Jarndyce,
I can’t leave a comment on your site for some reason. One problem with the idea of the 30 heading north (albeit going south) idea, as the Evening Standard p.3 has a picture of the bus, and the ‘destination’ board on the side appears to say "Islington – XXX Cross" (where XXXX is obscured by the door), which assuming it’s King’s Cross, would imply it was going south. Or do those things just show the routes, not necessarily the direction?
Sorry, ‘try’ wasn’t really a recommendation. It was more like the use of try in the sentence; ‘you’re busy? Try looking after four kids.’
What a truly ignorant post.
From the power of nightmares:
"Much of this threat is a fantasy, which has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It’s a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services, and the international media."
Well one of you ought to tell the relatives of those killed that they were killed by a fictitous group and perhaps tell the head of the UN Inspection body, Mohamad Al Baredi, who has claimed that Al- Whatsit are trying to acquire Nuclear Weapons.
The Power Of Nightmares is not even backed up by its own “sources” in particular, Jason Burke,
Burke says on the Power of Nightmares: "The idea…that bin Laden ran a coherent organization with operatives and cells all around the world of which you could be a member is a myth. There is no Al Qaeda organization. There is no international network with a leader; with cadres who will unquestioningly obey orders, with tentacles that stretch out to sleeper cells in America, in Africa, in Europe."
However, in his 2003 book, Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror, Burke is less dismissive of the idea that Al Qaeda was an organization than this soundbite suggests. Burke wrote that while the "al-Qaeda hardcore" consisted of relatively few people, "by late 2001, bin Laden and the men around him had access to huge resources, both symbolic and material, which they could use to project their power and influence internationally"–that sounds suspiciously like a "coherent organization" to me.
Another reason, I personally believe the Power Of Nightmares is malevolent is that it plays into the hands of anti- semites. Though The Power of Nightmares did not mention the fact that the majority of “Neocons” are jewish, it is well known and was explicitly stated on a previous BBC Panorama program that all the Neocons were jews. It was also made clear, in a BBC Panorama program, that of course all the “Neocons” are “jewish”. i.e “Iraq is Israels war” and do not the jews want to take over the world? You may think that this is far fetched, but all I ask you to do is log onto Al Jazeera, and look at the review of the Power of Nightmares, unfortunately I cannot post the link here.
I would suggest that anyone who buys "Nightmares" you have been taken in by a modern day “Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion”. It told you all you wanted to hear, it played to the oldest conspiracy theory in the world and added Ronald Reagan to bring it up to date with the hate figure of the left. What a bunch of suckers.
Think about it: Those evil neocons have caused the downfall of the evil communist regimes (Stalin killed 30 million of his own people), they have overthrown a medieval theocracy (The Taliban) and they have overthrown Sadam Hussein. Oh yes, and they have overthrown these evil regimes with democracies, were the people can vote for their leaders. Whereas these Islamic fundamentalists kill barbers for shaving beards, they ban music and alcohol (never mind the drugs that seem to sustain the people on this site)- Oh and pre- marital sex. Oh an Osama wants the return of Andalucia (part of modern day Spain) to the First Caliphate.
I’m better informed about Al-Q than you and than probably 99-99.5% of the population as a whole, so you can stick your patronising comments up your arse.
Your suggestion I talk to the victim’s families is witless:
* The Oklahoma bombing was not carried out by an enormous and shadowy bunch of fanatics with serious resources engaged in overthrowing US democracy;
* People said it was;
* They were wrong;
* I still wouldn’t like to tell Tim McVeigh’s victims that they were killed by a fictitious group.
Stalin’s death toll is about as relevant to the 1980s USSR as Torquemada’s death toll to discussions about the power of the Catholic Church today. Afghanistan outside of Kabul is *still* a medieval theocracy where women get killed for premarital sex or not wearing veils; Iraq is becoming *more* not *less* Islamist; and I really don’t give a fuck what Osama wants because he sure as hell ain’t getting it.
The Power Of Nightmares is not even backed up by its own “sources” in particular, Jason Burke
Really? Who was that bloke with the crew cut being interviewed on camera in "The Power of Nightmares" with the screen caption "Jason Burke" then?
Matthew: is that pic online anywhere? I’d like (well, you know what I mean) to see it. It ought not to make a difference to the theory anyway, as from both directions the bus would pass through Islington and KX, and those side-boards don’t always change order. The front one is the key, and that’s too messed up to make a proper judgement, AFAIK. And comments at my place are fine – not sure what’s going on there.
Dsquared- Can you read?
John B
OK, I will keep it simple for you, since you are clearly incapable of absorbing complex arguments:
1. What exactly in the Power of Nightmares are you saying has been validated by yesterdays bombing?
2. Are you saying that the whole of the Power Of Nightmares is correct?
3. What is you basis for saying you know more about Al Whatsit more than me? Prove it by answering coherently and concretely rather than you normally poor moral indignation.
1) The assertion that Al Q is an ideology connecting a bunch of local nutters using only the resources at their disposal, rather than an international terror group that arms and resources its cells.
2) I’m saying there is no evidence that the main thesis of the Power of Nightmares is wrong. Some of their historical detail may be incorrect, although I’m not aware of any.
3) I’ve read a hell of a lot about it (news, published reports, books, blogs), talked to several professional security analysts about it, researched articles on it, looked up facts when presented with strange assertions about it. Should your AQ-understanding qualifications go beyond that, then I apologise for my bold assertion.
1) Any idiot knows that what was Al Whatsit, as it was, was destroyed by the invasion of Afgahistan. Why did it take three hours of prime time tv to get this message across. Well, this is probably because this was not the main message of "Nightmares". I have to admit I have read the transcripts a few times now and I cannot work out what it is, except a tirade against those nasty neocons. That is the neocons who have done more to bring democracy to the world than anyone.
2. The power of nightmares says there was no islamic terrorost threat. I’ll repeat it again because I don’t think you have got it yet…
"And the greatest danger of all is international terrorism. A powerful and sinister network, with sleeper cells in countries across the world. A threat that needs to be fought by a war on terror. But much of this threat is a fantasy,"
So how was the "main Thesis" of the power of nightmares was correct.
Admit it you just liked it becasue they brought Reagan into it. You’ve been had..Of course its relevant that Stalin murdered 30 million people. Becasue those nasty neocons brought down a system that allowed Stalin to come to power and, of course its the title of this website. You said that the neocons and the islamic fundamentalists "draw on the same thing", they do not, the neocons have demonstrably overthrown totalitarian regimes. Whats a matter don’t you like history?
3. Oh well done, you’ve read a few articles on it. If you are so clever what is the main difference between Al Qaeda and previous Islamic terrorism?
PS: You are a hypocrite (like all lefties). You are now arguing that Iraq is more islamic now than under Sadam. Are you saying that all islamic peoples are terrorists? I do not believe so and I think you were arguing the same thing the other day?
I accept your apology
Expert interviewee on Sky just said that it was "<I>a plastic explosive of military type … something like Semtex</I>."
How does that affect your thesis, John?
"Islamist", not "Islamic". Knowing how to read is another one of my qualifications for understanding Al Qaeda.
My, my how far the mighty sink when they have to resort to spelling errors. He he he
If he was talking about the bus, I’d be mostly surprised. It’d have to be a very small quantity (which would again imply not having massive resources).
Picc train is another story, as mentioned above.
Bob: it’s not a typo, it’s a crucial difference. Islamist = brutal fanatics who want to impose extreme interpretations of Sharia and re-establish the Caliphate; Islamic = people who believe Allah is God and Mohammed is his prophet.
Scott: to be honest, Expert Interviewees say all sorts of things and this one has no real basis to speculate at the moment; the newswires are talking about a "pipe bomb", whatever that is. Also, there’s a big difference between "Semtex" and "something like Semtex". TATP is like Semtex in that its a plasticisable high explosive, but it’s not like Semtex in that it isn’t made by only a small number of factories and very hard to get hold of.
I think that me and John might have been somewhat hasty to say "no Semtex" because we don’t really have evidence for that but are entirely right on the broad historical sweep of "not very much access to explosives". If the police are correct to be talking about less than 10lb of explosive in each bomb, then the entire pyrotechnic content of yesterday’s attacks would fit into a single Palestinian suicide bomber’s explosive vest. Whoever carried out these attacks is not doing it on the budget of a big international terrorist organisation that commands huge resources.
Bob,
The Power of Nightmares did not say "there was no islamic terrorost threat". It said (as you correctly quote) that "much of this threat is a fantasy".
A fairly obvious distinction.
Oh come on John B
You can do better than this. Is that supposed to be a display of your superior knowledge on Al Whatsit. Can you not stick to the argument or are you a sore loser?
The police are still talking about the Piccadilly bomb being <10lb, so the greater damage there might have more to do with the size and shape of the tunnels; the Circle Line at Edgeware Road is a big side-by-side tunnel and not really a confined space.
I don’t think that anyone should discuss anything with Bob until he apologises for calling John a hypocrite above on the basis of his own misreading of John’s post. This is simple good manners.
DSquare
Can you read?
DSquare
I think john is old enough to speak for himself
Bob:
Islamist: bad bunch of bastards; nobody sane would want them in power anywhere, or ideally to exist.
Islamic: encompasses the above, but also about a billion other perfectly decent chaps and chappesses with no desire whatsoever to conquer or enslave anyone.
Do you understand why I think the difference is important yet, and why I’m pissed off you called me a hypocrite on the basis of your incomprehension of the difference?
Can anyone comment on the rumors that police thwarted two attacks one in Canary Wharf and one in Berkely Square?
Sorry John B
If that is what you meant by the term "Islamist", which I am sure you did, as it does in most dictionaries. However, in some dictionaries, i.e the Princeton on line dictionary
Islamist= (a scholar who knowledgeable in Islamic studies)
So you could be more knowledgeable than me on Al Whatsit, but please….continue to demonstrate this superior knowledge through rational argument, hopefully continuing from were we left off, bar the "islamist" confusion.
Also, as I understand it, Iraq is not becoming more Islamist as understood that Ayatollah Al Sistani is in favour of clear separation between church and state, he does not want an Iranian style theocracy.
Can anyone comment on the rumors that police thwarted two attacks one in Canary Wharf and one in Berkely Square?
Berkeley Square, I don’t know. Canary Wharf (if you’re referring to the rumour that armed police had shot dead a suicide bomber with a belt); almost certainly bollocks. We’ve had two alerts in the City today FWIW; one in Exchange Square and one in Cannon Street. There were meant to be controlled explosions but I didn’t hear a bang so I’m suspecting that they were both false alarms.
I need to go to the pub now. You might want to read Jason Burke‘s take on yesterday’s events, rather than getting into a pissing contest about who knows most about AQ (I’d be willing to bet a sizeable sum that Mr Burke knows rather more about it than either of us).
Whether Al Qaeda is a shadowy network ruled by central control to enforce a common ideology or a shadowy network of people who share a common ideology in order to enforce central control seems to me immaterial. They would still kill us just the same.
I think the Power of Nightmares reveals more about what Curtis assumes neocons really think, rather than what neocons actually do think. It’s what they believe and what they do that makes them a threat.
Policeman: "We think it was a lone nutter who sympathised with Al Qaeda, rather than an actual card carrying member"
Bomb Victim: "Phew, that makes all the difference".
Well yes but also "Non Bomb Victim: Actually that makes a lot of difference as it means that the threat to me of future attacks is much less serious".
The level of threat is dictated by the number of nuts sympathetic to AQ aims, not whether they carry membership cards.
Good. Me too. Think I’ll have a few pints of London Pride. I’m carrying on as before…
anon: organised nutters are more dangerous than disorganised nutters. With the worst will in the world, the average disaffected loony can’t cause much damage without money and planning, both of which can be supplied by an evil organisation.
We’re looking good on the "no Semtex" theory; some bloke from Jane’s is saying that all signs point to cheapo industrial plastique.
I bet the producers of "The power of nightmares" feel mighty stupid in the wake of the 7/7 terror attacks. So does anyone who actually believed that garbage.
The program is a cleverly well done glorified conspiracy theory..
As with most such theories they are often proven to be total bunk. The real nightmare is how many gullible fools get so taken in by such bunk, and how they shape their lives, views & morality on nothing more than a radical viewpoint propogated by a very small segment of the left that is frankly out of touch with any sense of reality and consumed with hatred itself.
Curtis talk about a castrated network of radicals that feel powerless and resort to extreme measures and views, how eloquent and ironic that what he was really describing is the 10% fringe of the left which is utterly powerless, unable to gain mass appeal and frustrated to extremes over this. This same group is marginally aligned with the anti imperialist terrorists, solely based on their mutual hatred of American power, power I would add that has been gained legitimately via the vote of the majorities!
I can only agree with Fred above, but to believers credit at least they do so because they want to believe so badly, too bad those beliefs are misguided and frankly the real fantasy land.
John B would you like to revise your initial post in light of recent evidence?
What recent evidence do you suggest I consider? I’ve seen nothing (and I’ve been looking, believe me) to refute the original post.