Great article Tim! Although I confess to subscribe to the more "American" reponse cited in the article. "RIGHT AFTER September 11, a question widely asked in the American and European media was: Why do they hate us? It was not, to be sure, the first question out of the mouths of most Americans. That question was: “What are their names and addresses and how quickly can we dispatch a B52 to their neighbourhood?” Nevertheless, there is no shortage of Americans who seem willing to accept the blame on behalf of their country for terrorist hatred. Michael Moore and Neocynic being notable examples. But I'm also reminded of a liberal politician in San Diego who along with her husband, was robbed and beaten at gunpoint. Her attitude toward gun control changed that very day. Perhaps that will be true for the self-loathing who suddenly realize when they must defend themselves or die, that the motivation of their attacker just became secondary in importance. Will they apologize or fight? Only Darwin knows. IM

Are you strong enough to hear what these people ask for? Can you imagine why these people have a problem with us, so we should serious consider their opinions... Breathe easy...and read the following. To stop these people is to stop the wars... lwwb roger Dear Western Nations, For years you have ignored our protests as you have supported Israel, slandered our religion and referred to us as murdering terrorist bastards in your media and entertainment sources. Recently (1991) you decided to begin bombing, in order to withhold from us any weapons with which we could disable an increasingly bellicose Israeli presence. In effect, you wish us to be submissive to your rule, or be called murders. Consequently, we struck back, in New York City, in Bali, and now in London. The reason for this is simple: you are far more numerous and wealthier than we are, thus we cannot afford direct confrontation, but must fight you any way we can. This includes blowing your citizens into paste and destroying your economies with fear. If you do not mind starving our children, and bombing them from 30,000 feet, surely we are not expected to mind blowing up your own as we stare them in the eyes, giving up our own lives in the process? Muslim lands do not wish to join your death-crusade in which technology and Jewish thought make your "liberal" people self-obsessed, grotesquely fat, and disgustingly detached from nature. We prefer to be poorer but keep our traditional ways, as we know these to be truth. You do not allow us this option, so we fight. What happened in London is a first taste of what will soon be a daily happening. If you wish to re-open diplomatic relations with the true populations of Muslim lands, please do the following: 1. Stop slandering Islam at every chance you get, in your editorials, movies, news, TV shows, newspapers, newsmagazines, and Internet pornography. 2. Cease unquestioning support of Israel, and consider Muslim interests as well as Jewish and Christian ones. 3. Remove all non-believers, whether there through "peaceful" cultural assimilation (business) or warlike cultural assimilation (the "peacekeepers" occupying our lands, raping out women, bombing our homes). 4. Allow us to determine our own destiny without your intervention. Since you need our oil, if you ask politely, we will most probably sell it to you and thus preserve your superpower status. If you are able to agree to the above - that is, treating us as autonomous countries and not future vassal states of America - we will get along just fine. Until then, you can expect more of your citizens to die in horror as we defend ourselves. Sincerely, The Unpacified Elements of Islam Kalashnikovbad, Pakistan, July 7, 2005 JIHAD! Source: http://bbs.anus.com/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=003630

Tim The Gerald Baker article is in my opinion a cliched and tired piece of writing & uses much of the usual terminology and inaccuracy. And this is what US citizens believe? He talks about “pure, certifiable lunatics who inhabit the ideological theme parks at the Socialist Worker and the editorial pages of The Guardian”. The Guardian, in the real world, is a perfectly respectable broadsheet newspaper. It is to the left of the spectrum, but to paint it as extreme is laughable. It has a good website – check it out. The Socialist Worker may be another kettle of fish, but it’s not a mainstream paper, and to put the two together draws an entirely false picture. If I went to my local Indian newsagent and asked for the Socialist Worker, I highly doubt they’d have it. The Guardian is on sale everywhere. He then goes on to talk of the BBC. He obviously doesn’t watch it much. He invokes Orwell’s 1984 Ministry of Truth as if the BBC is some Stalinist news management organisation. Again this is laughable. In reality, the majority of it’s output is firmly middle-of-the-road. It’s coverage of the bombings has been extremely balanced in my view. This is after all a rapidly evolving story in which new details emerge which change the picture. These have been given as the story develops [after clearance by Police/Intelligence of course] and has been handled extremely well. There has been no major criticism of it’s coverage in the UK to my knowledge. I then find that not only do us brits hate the US, we also hate ourselves! To quote him, we suffer from “self loathing”. We seem to hear this so much from some quarters. It’s such easy mud slinging and allows one to dismiss another’s view because of their supposed hatred. He then proceeds to paint several hypothetical scenarios, asks what the reaction from “Britain’s thought-leaders” would be, then supplies the answer himself. Neat trick! Really top journalism. He wants to portray a simplistic picture of a complex situation. It might suit some to believe this sort of piece but it doesn’t help anyone.

Surely the act of a mature, reasoning adult (in the instance of individual or nation) is to seek to understand why one is hated.... there is always a reason,it takes two to tango as they say... and to understand that there can only ever, and I repeat, ever be self-loathing if, at a subconscious level one 'knows' one has acted without integrity. Nothing exists in a vacuum. Where there is true lack of guilt there is no place for self-loathing. One may regret, what one perceives as misdirected criticism or aggression, and continue to question one's role in the process, but self-loathing, never. Those who use this term do so in order to dismiss or deny the reality of their own, or their nation's actions. There's an old saying: If one person criticises you, then you may ignore it; if more than one does you would be wise to listen and if many do, then you, not they are the problem. The hatred felt by many toward America in particular and the West in general is sourced in a history of arrogance, aggression, hypocrisy, exploitation and bigotry. And it is not just Muslims. Ask any person in the Third World, from the Middle East, to Asia, Africa, India and beyond, what they think of America in particular and the West in general. Within that answer you will begin to understand why there really should be 'self-loathing.' Because the truth is the developed world has spent more time exploiting the undeveloped world than it has working to bring the sorts of freedoms and benefits that we all enjoy. It is hypocrisy of the most egregious kind to suggest that all America and its minions are seeking to do is to improve the quality of life for others. Actions speak louder than words and the actions say: "We want you to be democratic, to be free, to have a better standard of living, but only if in the doing we still have a measure of control over you, dominance of you economically, and there is no diminution in the quality of our life in order that yours may improve." And people still wonder why they hate us!

I will have to agree with eric. At no point do I hate myself. I believe that youre really laying it on thick Mike. There are also those who have looked into the face of their loved ones killers and have said "I forgive you." Where was the relief for the kurds back in the 80's during Ronnie's watch. He used Saddam. Now, Saddam is evil and must be removed? Day late dollar short. Those little babies laying with yellow froth coming out of their nose and mouths, which Saddam video'd, where was that white shiny night of democracy? What about the poor starving people right here in America? Can you honestly say that you see no problem with any of it? Did you watch the History Channel's special on the life of Saddam? I did. Extremely illuminating. We used Saddam when it was convenient, and we knew he had gas, we helped him get it when it looked like he wasn't going to defeat Iran. It's documented. Wiggle out of that one.

Ok, now dont I feel stupid. That's what I get for trying to catch up late at night. (well late for me.) Why would someone bring up an old thread by someone else, when they can very easily type their own? Seems kind of lazy to me. Well isnt that foolish.

Im sorry Peter, could you explain that second paragraph for me, as in what your trying to get across. Im a bit confused by your punctuation and possible typos..."you are pay attention-however manifested-....etc." Not getting you.