Massive Rant. You have been warned.
“How could they be so cruel as to attack children and young people?”
Because they are called “terrorists” for a reason.
“Why bomb a concert with lots of young people?”
Because they want to make life so horrible that you give in to their every request, and killing kids is a great way to do just that.
I did not reply verbally to the hand-wringing TV presenter Monday night, but I did give him a mental single-digit salute version of a face-palm. What I wanted to say was, “Look, it goes back over a hundred years to the idea of the ‘propaganda of the deed’ that the real 19th Century anarchists and anti-royalists developed. They put bombs in coffee shops and cafes, and killed prominent people because the deed caught everyone’s attention and showed how strong and dangerous the bomber and his cause were. Add in the idea that bombings and the like are the best way for ‘oppressed peoples’ to strike the imperial powers, and the emphasis western culture places on entertaining youth, and duh! Blowing up kids coming out of a concert seems like a fantastically effective way to force a government into agreeing to your desires. Especially since westerners generally don’t have kids to spare anymore, even if they are ‘just girls’.”
They attacked a concert full of teens and tweens because it is shocking and because they are a visible and effective target if the goal is to stir up fear and shock. No one in their right mind would launch a terror attack against, oh, the NRA convention, or the National Association of Retired Master Sergeants 2017 Shooting Festival. 1) the attacker wouldn’t get far. 2)The general reaction would be head shaking and comments like “What a dumb-bunny,” and general derision, not fear.
Cold? Yes. But the world is cold. Mother Nature is out to get you and there are evil people in the world, men and women who have chosen to do things that, in my opinion, set them outside the bounds of the law. Just not quite the way a lot of the talking heads would take that to mean.
Things like the Manchester bombing, the 7/7 bombings in London, the 3/3 attacks in Madrid, et al strike me as good times to bring back the original out-law. That being, someone is read out of the protections of the law for their actions, and they are wolfsheads, fair game for anyone seeking revenge. “These people have been proven guilty in a court of law of aiding and abetting [insert attack here]. They have two hours, then all protections of the law are removed.”
Cold and cruel? Maybe. Perhaps just locking them in a room with selected family members of the deceased and maimed for an hour, an hour without consequences for the family members, would be better. Less risk of bystanders getting injured.
No, I am not in a forgiving mood, because, as successful as this attack will likely be based on early media coverage from Britain and Europe, there will be more. Not that anyone would be surprised by that statement, I’m sure, but let’s face it. The goal is to intimidate the governments and opinion leaders into submission. It’s worked pretty well as of 18 hours after the attack. Although the German Minister for Immigration may be wishing she’d phrased things a little differently when she said a day or two ago that Germany has no Leitkulture, no dominant culture, and that immigrants are the basis for cultures in Germany.*
I do realize that what these attack-organizers and planners want is, in part, for civilians to take matters into our own hands, to attack Muslims in return, and so drive those who are not currently committed to jihad into the movement. However, if, say, a mosque’s leadership and financial backers are found guilty of supporting terror, or aiding someone who committed a crime, why not allow the families of the dead and injured to claim the property, tear it down if they so desire, and make other use of it? Why not confiscate the bank accounts of the offending institutions and use the funds to pay for the medical treatment of the injured and the burials of the dead? After the connection is proven in a court of law. Aaaaaand if the families want to turn the place into, oh, say, a pig farm, why not? Make the law apply to all religious groups and charitable institutions, so no one can say that it is aimed solely at Muslims. And then if someone shrieks about racism, well, aren’t they assuming that it is aimed at [insert group here], meaning they are the person accusing predominately [group] members of being violent?
It won’t happen, not without something so horribly dreadful that I don’t even want to speculate what it might be.
The ‘propaganda of the deed’ is working, or so it looks from less than 24 hours after the fact. Will it work again? I fear so, at least in Europe. Britain might be shifting a little. For the sake of the people, I hope it is. But as long as the authorities fear being called racist or Islamophobic more than they fear injustice, attacks like this, and disasters like the heinous crime that was committed over several years in Rotherham, will continue.
*If you go back to the AD 150s-900s, she might have a point. But that’s not what she was saying.