| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| Outrage as Livingstone tries to 'explain' suicide bombers |
| 2005-07-21 |
| 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 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. |
| Posted by:anonymous5089 |
| #24 It's possible you good folks have nailed the silver lining in today's attacks: that Red Ken is clearly shown to be a demented asshole, not a colorful throwback. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-07-21 21:35 |
| #23 The good news is that Red Ken is a big fan of Churchill. The bad news is that it's Ward rather than Winston. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-07-21 21:26 |
| #22 Bill O'Reilly was interviewing a British journalist about today's events. The journalist tried to explain that Red Ken is simply a colourful eccentric, but Bill wasn't having any of it when I turned the tv off (like the man's substance, can't abide his style). I think it's time for Londoners to accept that this particular "eccentricity" has been moved beyond the Pale by today's events. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-07-21 21:05 |
| #21 Even more misguided idiots. |
| Posted by: Carl in N.H. 2005-07-21 20:24 |
| #20 Who elects such misguided idiots? |
| Posted by: John Q. Citizen 2005-07-21 18:19 |
| #19 In the US we have, for starters, Howard Dean, and Dick "Turban" Durbin... Everybody has these types, and their cadre of sycopants... |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-07-21 18:01 |
| #18 Red Ken is the Mayor of the largest city in the UK. He speaks for Londoners by extension, since it's residents seem to be perfectly happy with him. They elected him after all. Look for the pressure to cut and run, to do the "Neville Chamberlain" thing from the UK media and the âback benchersâ There are also plenty of UK residents who hold to this socialist âpacifistâ meme who are applying political pressure. Sorry to be blunt. I would whack this fool up side the head if He crossed my path. A total creep and willing to sell out the US throughly. I can't abide him or George George Galloway and I am sure they both represent a significant portion of the UK citizens thought and feelings. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet 0â Doom 2005-07-21 17:03 |
| #17 If Mayor Livingstone of London ever has a biopic made of his rise to power, I have the perfect actor to suggest. He's even English! Only one problem. The actor is dead... |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-07-21 16:20 |
| #16 Kalle, the Brits were in Iraq for the oil in the early 20th century (As the US was in Soddiland since the 1930s). During WWI and WWII, Iraq was a key supplier of oil to Brit forces. However, the intervening couple of decades saw the disintigration of the Empire, finished by WWII. Since then, the Brits have had a commercial relationship. Ken's problem is that he a loony left tinfoil-hat-wearing moonbat. |
| Posted by: Brett 2005-07-21 16:18 |
| #15 Wow, I had no idea I was part of the great conspiracy AvoicefromIRAN. Shall I tell our vassals in the States to Nuke a few sites in Iran to show you that you're right? It's not a problem, I've got the 'special for English only' number for NORAD right here... How old are you?
Cheers! |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2005-07-21 16:09 |
| #14 Or to clarify. Better a Persian Parking lot than 100 dead buddies. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-07-21 14:27 |
| #13 Ima voice from MuzzieLand Peace be upon all yur freeholds and Cadillacs. It's is written than Ford is scum and will forever be haram. In keeping with my peasack I'm declare friendship for all except nose touchers, for the prophet sed noose touches is Haaram and Quiin the Eskimo is forbooten! It is written in the big book of Janes, that only one other fleet matters and it gets angry quickly. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-07-21 14:26 |
| #12 Red Ken thinks British presence in the Middle East was all about the need for oiiiiiiiiiil in the 1920s. He also thinks Bin Laden was "recruited and trained" by Americans. In other words, Dhimmi Ken is a complete ignoramus or a liar. Could be both. |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2005-07-21 12:59 |
| #11 combining his criticism of British foreign policy with a robust line on anti-terrorism laws. Having your cake and eating it? Another bomb? Tony's fault. More restrictions? I'm all for it. Give the government more power. When it has enough power, I will gladly accept the call to wield that power. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-07-21 12:22 |
| #10 "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. Riiiiiight! Look what happened in Africa! |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-07-21 12:18 |
| #9 Well, Kenny, when they terrorize me into agreeing with you, I'll send you a fax. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-07-21 12:17 |
| #8 Bad timing, Kenny. Baaaaaaaad timing... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2005-07-21 11:59 |
| #7 Well We Iranians in general from very top to the very bottom and ofcourse not the very few old goats that godwilling sooner will pay for all suffering they r causing Iranian people in general and Die after. In our history from childhood we believe the Amercans in general are good freinds of us not including some of Generals who would not hesitate to bomb US itself just for the fun of it. and all the Iranians are have always aknowleged that as history has shown many times over the English are running the show as they were the hated so much in the world that now they encourage Amerika to do what the Amerkans Have not done in their glorified history. sorry for my Language but i think sooner Iranian people and Amerikan people come together all the plots of English and the Arabs will be useless. GOD BLESS Amerika GOD BLESS IRAN and all the peace loving and just people of the world. LETS say I am also a "PATRIOT" and love to see the film many times over to see and see how the brits were kicked out of US. LOTS OF LOVE FROM IRAN to the people of US . |
| Posted by: AvoicefromIRAN 2005-07-21 11:38 |
| #6 And I suppose the events of today just prove his point? Perchance he'll be strung up by those who don't care about explanations anymore? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2005-07-21 11:17 |
| #5 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. Please continue, Sir, and dipense all of your wisdom as you wish. Pay no attention to any criticism. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-07-21 11:16 |
| #4 Islam has been trying to take over the world since 600AD. Don't think they haven't stopped since getting thrown out of spain and the battle of Vienna. Now they are using the enemies in our own countries (see liberals) to do what they couldn't do through force of arms. |
| Posted by: mmurray821 2005-07-21 11:15 |
| #3 Red Ken may have "fallen and can't get up" after today's attacks. Idjit |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-07-21 10:59 |
| #2 If not british colonial policy after WW1 then it would be the reconquest or the crusades. Red Ken doesn't get it, the bad guys have an agenda of conquest, yeah they may recycle his lefty excuses to convince useful idiots to sew decent but they don't care much about that really. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2005-07-21 10:54 |
| #1 its all Lloyd George's fault!!!! How pray tell, is Tony Blair responsible for british colonial policy in the 1920's??? |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2005-07-21 10:33 |