And they deny me a column! There is NO conservative column in the newspaper, and there hasn't been any since I started there.
Here is a letter to the editor that got published after Mark's lame column.
A European view of the London attacksDavid Terron
Mark Johnson's comments on how we in the UK were asking for the recent terrorist attacks have been made available via the Internet.
Since Johnson "sees things differently," he fails to see the whole picture. Calling the democratically elected government of the U.S.A. terrorists serves only to encourage real terrorists. If you equate the actions of Hitler to the actions of Bush without mentioning Stalin, Pol Pot and Saddam, then you do your whole case a disservice from the outset. If Bush, Blair, etc. are dictators, how are they prevented from pursuing many of their desired programs or laws? Well, there is a democratically-elected opposition to stop them and which often does!
Johnson claims the World Trade Centre was selected as a target because it was connected to the government. That al-Queda themselves have said that it was selected as a "prestige target" means nothing to him. After all, would hitting the State Department building get the same coverage as hitting the tallest, most visible symbol of American commerce? The general population in the WTC and Pentagon worked and lived by both targets and flew on the planes. They included all faiths and all races, not just citizens of the U.S.A.
Johnson compounds his credibility problem by claiming that Spain threw out her "liar of a president" and is now safe. Err, shouldn't that be Prime Minister Aznar (not President) who was not standing for election anyway in a country that has been attacked again since then? The investigation into the Madrid bombing concluded the plans were made long before Iraq, or indeed Afghanistan.
There was no "invasion" of Afghanistan. Kabul fell to the Northern Alliance in November 2001, with the consequent collapse of the Taliban, but there were no foreign combat units in Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance did receive air support and assistance from Special Forces (both U.S. and British); that, however, is not an invasion. Extensive foreign combat forces — including Canadian — only entered the country after the Taliban had been deposed, and those forces entered with the agreement of the Northern Alliance. So if thanks to the "awesome" Chrétien, Canada is safe from attack by virtue of not being involved in Iraq, can he explain why Canada has been involved in Afghanistan and is increasing her assistance to that country? In fact, did Chrétien not stand up in Parliament saying Canada was sending 800 troops to Iraq, and then the next day (the eve of a Quebec election), recant?
With over 800 citizens butchered by Islamists in the last year, perhaps Johnson should be asked for his suggestions about how Thailand should alter its foreign policy towards Iraq. (In case he is unaware, they are not involved in Iraq).
So little understanding is being displayed by a "clear thinking" individual such as Johnson. How arrogant for a fourth-year politics student but more worrying for his tutors as he seems to have failed to grasp the most important thing of all — appeasement never works.
"The ‘We told you so' crowd all just somehow know that the Iraq war was an effective cause of the deaths in London. How do they know this, these clever people? For what they need to know is not just that Iraq was one of a number of influencing causes, but that it was the specific, and a necessary, motivating cause for the London bombings.
"If it was only an influencing motivational cause among others, and if, more particularly, another such motivational cause was supplied by the military intervention in Afghanistan, then it's not the case that the London bombings wouldn't have happened but for the Iraq war.
"Ever on the lookout for damning causes, the root-causers never go for the most obvious of these. This is the cause, indeed, which shows, by its absence, why most critics of the Iraq war or of anything else don't murder people when they are angry. It is the fanatical, fundamentalist belief system which teaches hatred and justifies these acts of murder. That cause somehow gets a free pass from the hunters-out of causes."
That from a famed British left-wing professor, Norman Geras in the Guardian, the most left-wing paper in the U.K. apart from the communist Morning Star. If senior left-wingers in the most multicultural city in the world are saying this, then Johnson's article only serves to highlight his moral bankruptcy.
If al-Queda are reacting to what Johnson calls "egoistical imperialistic powers" then why are they murdering children, women and civilians by the hundreds in Iraq and elsewhere? Remember East Timor, Madrid, Bali, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Kenya, Tanzania, Yemen, Turkey, Egypt and yes, New York. The war in Iraq, the Israeli-Palestine conflict — these are flashpoints in the war; they are not wholly cause or effect. In 1991, along with many Muslim countries, a U.N. coalition liberated Kuwait, a Muslim country, from Saddam Hussein and in the process, saved the holiest Islamic sites in Saudi Arabia. That in Bosnia under a Democrat U.S. president the U.N. eventually intervened to save Muslims from being massacred; we did the same again in Kosovo. Furthermore, even the 9/11 Commission and the Clinton administration's Richard Clark agreed that Iraq was linked to al-Queda, providing safe camps and assistance.
In summary, some terrorists who happen to be Muslim declared war on the rest of the world years ago. This is why we must band together — the fact that all sides in the U.K. and many in the U.S.A. and elsewhere are coming together regardless of political beliefs to stop them shows that most people "get" it. There will, however, always be people like Johnson who choose not to or cannot understand.
To end, a quote from Peter Thatchell, the foremost gay rights campaigner in the U.K. today:
"Terrorism is not socialism; it is the tactic of fascism. But much of the left doesn't care. Never mind what the Iraqi people want, it wants the U.S. and U.K. out of Iraq at any price, including the abandonment of Iraqi socialists, trade unionists, democrats, gays and feminists. If the fake left gets its way, the ex-Baathists and Islamic fundamentalists could easily seize power, leading to Iranian-style clerical fascism and a bloodbath. I used to be proud to call myself a leftist. Now I feel shame."
If as Johnson rather nastily proclaims, "what goes around comes around," then I sincerely hope that Canada never gets attacked as he has run out of excuses. Canada is not safe because it is not involved in Iraq. It is not a case of if, but when. I think even the Liberal Party of Canada is beginning to realize this, hence the recent comments by General Hillier about "murderers and scumbags" and the support he received from the defence minister and others in the Liberal government.
—David Terron
University of Stirling
Scotland, United Kingdom
Editor's note: The writer is a 4th year student teacher (English(Hons) and History) at the University of Stirling, former soldier with 13 combat tours and now 80 per cent disabled as result of bomb attack during service.
