– fordi tiden kræver et MODSPIL

29. Jun 2007

Terrorbombe i London - eller galoperende hysteri?

Der er fundet og demonteret en meget farlig bombe i London, læser vi op til flere steder.

Hvor farlig var bomben? The Register er ikke imponeret:
The guys with the guns and cameras and listening devices have been on a roll since 9/11, embarrassing their clip-board-toting rivals in the race for public money, even though, collectively, they've taken or made meaner far more lives than they can ever hope to protect with their strategy of violence in the name of peace, and fascism in the name of liberty.

To keep the billions rolling in, they've got to produce a terrorist every now and then. Only real terrorists are hard to come by, so clowns and stooges with harebrained schemes end up doing bin Laden's perp walk periodically.

Today we have news from London, where a "big [explosive] device" was discovered inside a parked car near Piccadilly Circus. The device consisted of petrol, propane gas cylinders, and nails. The car containing it had been abandoned after its driver was observed piloting it erratically, crashing it, then running off, like a true professional. Ambulance workers called to assist nearby noticed what they initially thought was smoke inside the car, but which likely was petrol vapour, and contacted police.

Bomb disposal specialists made it safe, and police officials and politicians began slyly invoking the terrorist bogeyman. Heaven forbid the public should be starved of their regular fear rations.

"It is obvious that if the device had detonated there could have been serious injury or loss of life", Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke intoned gravely.

Ah, if it had detonated. Yes, it could have been a real horror. Only, the device could not have detonated. Not under any circumstances. You see, the terrorist wannabe clown who built it left out a crucial element: an oxidiser. The device was pure pre-teen boy fantasy ...

This should have been dismissed for what it is: an event on the level of some teenagers getting a tremendously foolish notion, and being drunk enough for it to appeal to them. But we're hearing whispers of terrorism instead - much as we heard from the Americans when they foiled a "terrorist plot" to blow up fuel storage tanks at Kennedy International. It would have been devastating, prosecutors told us. Only that "plot" had the same hole in it: air makes a lousy oxidiser. If it had been carried out, it would certainly have made a bigger fireball than the one in London would have made. But that's about it.

So why is this such big news? Because clowns have got to be passed off as terrorists. Because a vast industry depends on terrorists, real and imagined, to justify its existence.
Man må da i hvert fald give de gode folk på The Register ret i, at hvis det var teknisk umuligt for "bomben" at eksplodere, så er der måske ikke grund til at gøre helt så meget ud af det, som der her lægges op til ...

Da IRA gentagne gange angreb London i 80erne og 90erne, blev den britiske presse meget rost for sin ansvarlige dækning af terroren: Pressen havde forstået, at hvis den begyndte at medvirke til at opskræmme befolkningen, ville de blot hjælpe terroristerne ved at undergrave befolkningens moral.

Vore dages presse viser ingen tegn på en sådan ansvarlighed. Måske man har fået andre prioriteter? Register-artiklen konkluderer:

"We live now in the grip of the security-industrial complex, and that hungry beast demands to be fed. We feed it money hand over fist, and in return, it feeds us fear biscuits, which we are expected to accept with gratitude."

Update, søndag d. 1.:

Okay, sagen har nu taget en ret dramatisk drejning med angrebet på lufthavnen i Glasgow - der er åbenbart tale om en lidt større, men bemærkelsesværdigt usofistikeret, gruppe aktioner mod Storbritannien. Facts om, hvad der foregår, begynder vel at dukke op i løbet af de næste par dage.