Bombings in London: The high price of Blair and Bush’s imperialist policies

On July 7th, during the morning rush hour when millions of people were travelling to their places of work or study, the centre of London was rocked by a series of bomb blasts on the public transport system – three on the underground and one on a bus. At the time of writing the official casualty figures are 49 dead, 25 missing and 700 injured.

The internationalist revolutionaries of the Trotskyist Fraction for the Rebuilding of the Fourth International – of which the PTS is part – condemn these kinds of indiscriminate attacks that cause death and injury to ordinary working people, students and immigrants. We extend our sympathy to those who are injured and to the relatives of the dead. At the same time we denounce Bush, Blair and the heads of state of the imperialist powers for their hypocrisy. They are quick to ‘lament’ what happened and blame Al Qaeda for the attacks, arguing that they are carried out by ‘barbaric people’ and that they threaten the ‘values’ and ‘freedoms’ of Western society, but in fact Bush, Blair and their allies in the so-called ‘war on terror’, under which they justify the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, bear the main responsibility for creating the conditions for the attacks in London, as well as those in Madrid.

Gathered in Scotland for the G8 Summit, the leaders of the most powerful and rich countries in the world discussed how to continue the domination of the semicolonial world.

They immediately tried to take advantage of the attacks by pushing forward their ‘anti-terrorist’ repressive policies and laws that attack basic civil liberties, that authorise states to hold in prison those who are considered ‘terrorist suspects’ even when there is no evidence against them, and allow the ill-treatment of detainees, thus legalising state terrorism against immigrants, Muslim communities and ultimately those that protest against their imperialist policies. This could in turn unleash racist attacks against these communities.

Today, those who allied themselves with Bush in the war against Iraq and those who opposed unilateral military action, seeking instead a UN resolution, put their differences aside with the aim of ‘collaborating in the fight against terrorism’. They cover up the fact that the true cause of the bomb blasts in London is imperialist oppression, of which the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan by two of the most powerful armies in the world – which up to now has caused the death of 100,000 civilians – is only another aggravated expression. This aggressive policy has had the effect of increasing to levels never seen before hatred of American and British imperialism.

But attacks like those in London are not the way to defeat these imperialist policies: not only because the victims in general are ordinary workers but also because indiscriminate bombings provide arguments to reactionaries to justify repressive measures, and eventually will enable warmongering governments – in many cases discredited ones like Blair’s – to try to regain a social base for their ‘war on terrorism’. At the same time, they are a blow against the international unity of the workers and oppressed of the metropolitan countries and their counterparts in the semicolonial world – a unity that is essential if the warmongering policies of the imperialist powers are to be defeated.

As we said after the attacks in Madrid on March 11, 2004, the words of Leon Trotsky, co-leader of the Russian Revolution and head of the Red Army, are still valid: “In our eyes, individual terror is inadmissible precisely because it belittles the role of the masses in their own consciousness, reconciles them to their powerlessness, and turns their eyes and hopes towards a great avenger and liberator who some day will come and accomplish his mission.”(‘The Marxist Position on Individual Terrorism’, in Leon Trotsky, Against Individual Terrorism, Pathfinder, 1974) What’s more, Trotsky was referring to terrorist groups in Russia and other countries that targeted individual members of the ruling class and security forces, not the civil population in general as is the case with the current attacks. Although the authors of the attacks have not been identified, it seems that they were sympathisers of Al Qaeda, a reactionary organisation led by ex-members of the Saudi ruling class, and an enemy of the self-organisation and struggle of the Muslim masses.

Only the international unity of the workers and oppressed, and their organised struggle, will be able to put an end to the abuses, the exploitation and the wars of oppression driven by capitalism and imperialist governments.

Britain has been one of the centres of opposition to Bush and Blair’s war against Iraq. In London, on February 15, 2003, we saw the largest demonstration in British history with nearly two million people on the streets, shouting ‘No to War!’ and ‘Bush and Blair are the real terrorists!’. In the recent general elections, Blair’s parliamentary majority was reduced as voters punished him for his unconditional alliance with Bush.

So far, there has not been a wave of protests against Blair after the bombings, and it remains to be seen whether the mood following the attacks will be favourable to Blair or whether it will stimulate opposition to the war and demands for the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq.

We call on workers, students, youth, immigrants and all those who oppose the war to fight against any harassment of the Muslim community in Britain, and to redouble their support for the Iraqi people in their efforts to defeat the imperialist occupation of their country, for the national liberation of the Palestinian masses, and for the withdrawal of imperialism from the entire Middle East.

July 8, 2005
Trotskyist Fraction, for the rebuild of the Fourth International
 http://www.ft-europa.org/
E-mail:  contact@ft-europa.org

Brazilian man killed in London not connected to bombing
23-07-2005 20:10
 http://www.midiaindependente.org/pt/blue/2005/07/324689.shtml

New Bad Scotland Yard -- Brasileiro morto pela polícia inglesa.
23-07-2005 22:35
 http://www.midiaindependente.org/pt/blue/2005/07/324700.shtml

Confirmado: "terrorista" assassinado pela polícia inglesa era brasileiro
Círculo Bolivariano de São Paulo - 23-07-2005 17:27
 http://www.midiaindependente.org/pt/blue/2005/07/324664.shtml

Rebuilding of the Fourth International...airport?


btw should that not be Faction, rather than Fraction, unless you are a slice, maybe a slice of life even, in the pancake of world history, nowadays a little flat, but its nice to see effort.

The terrorists are the only people that killed in London. The terrorists are to blame for the London bombings not Tony Blair. Tony Blair didn't tell the terrorists to strap explosives to themselves and kill innocent people. You should be ashamed.

"The terrorists are the only people that killed in London."

Well, now even you will have to admit the cops killed someone too.

" The terrorists are to blame for the London bombings not Tony Blair. Tony Blair didn't tell the terrorists to strap explosives to themselves and kill innocent people. You should be ashamed."

Tony Blair told uk soldiers to go kill iraqi people for fabricated and illegal reasons. With or without the london bombings, that's a war crime.

Staging An Attack To
Fix The Coverup
Of Another
From LibertyForum Post By "Impatient"
7-23-5


This latest "attack" is supposed to correct some faults in the first without causing further mayhem.

What has given them the most trouble with the first attack? Their choice of patsies.

They assumed that a loose Muslim connection would be enough to persuade everyone that these lads from Leeds were suicide bombers. But rather than clinch it for the planners, it backfired and the most common and reasonable question that everyone has about the suicide bomber fiction was invoked: How could young men who were not religious fanatics, who were educated, decent fellows, with loving families, and bright futures ­ how could they kill themselves and others?

Another unforeseen problem was the effusive praise coming from Efraim Halevi that described the London bombings as "near-perfect". Too many people could not get a picture in their minds of four young men with rucksacks able to so perfectly execute simultaneous bombings. It caused doubts that have not been quelled. Too many people saw the hand of the Mossad and its affiliates in the earlier bombing because the four "bombers with rucksacks" did not evoke the necessary sophisticated timing, operational capacity, and scope.

The latest "attack" is supposed to reaffirm that young men with rucksacks are perfectly capable of a simultaneous triggering of devices, a demonstrable fearlessness in the face of death, and a disregard for the lives of others, even women with babies.

Because all four bombs malfunctioned this time round, it tells us that the bombers are not the Mossad or any other intelligence agency because 100% malfunction is very unprofessional, it may mean that their first bombing was just good luck, not expertise.

While the rucksacks in the first bombing have not turned up, this new bombing tells us once again that four young men carried bomb-laden packs aboard the trains and [would have] died when they detonated.

The investigation has not proceeded methodically. The whole question of how the bombing was done and who did it was effectively squelched when they began looking for the needle in the haystack ­ the CCTV films. Without knowledge of the type of bombs, their power, placement, and detonation, there could be absolutely no reason to begin looking at CCTV tapes. They could not know what to look for without the certainty that the bombs were carried on, and not placed beforehand.

It is significant that of all the thousands of hours of CCTV tape they have examined, the only tape they seem to have of the young men from Leeds does not come from London at all! In the pictures we have seen the lads are in Luton, 25 minutes away. Unless they can show us the "bombers" going their separate ways and boarding three or four different trains I will not believe that the young men ever made it to London. Seeing them together at Luton means nothing if they cannot be placed getting on the trains at exactly the right time to take them the right distance from King's Cross before they explode.

In the case of the 7/7 bombings, going straightaway to the video tapes was very premature and irrational. It can only mean that they knew what they would find because they had planted the "evidence". It makes no sense to begin looking at thousands of hours of video tape from as far away as Luton without any idea of what you are looking for. What could it be? Rucksacks, packages, briefcases, baby strollers, gym bags? Suspicous looking people of a certain race? And remember that the first story was that at least 24 people had been involved.

What would be the motivation to look at the tapes from Luton? Did they also look at tapes from video cameras at the airports and bus stations? It would seem to be just as reasonable to look at those tapes as looking at Luton. And why is the Luton tape the only tape?

Luton is interesting because an office of ICTS (the Israeli security firm) is about a mile from a Thameslink station. ICTS is actually located in the Luton and Dunstable NHS Hospital. It seems a little odd that this firm that handles security for the Stansted airport would be located at the Hospital.

Just like the problem with 9/11 and Madrid - there were no hijackers and no bombers to film. They tried to get around that on 7/7 by getting some patsies to photograph. They did not leave it to chance, for those picked had to be disposed of as though they had been killed in the blasts. Never Mind the "Evidence," Who Planted it? The "investigation" that led to the Leeds four was not a real investigation because the videotape evidence was "planted" and the investigation was "led" to find it. People seem to overlook this fact and assume that there were real clues that led the "investigators" to check the video cameras in Luton. Luton is distant from London and a real investigation would have no more reason to check those cameras than they would the cameras at Stansted or Heathrow or the bus stations or Thameslink stations in other directions. They vaguely justify looking northward and in Leeds because one mother called about her missing son - one mother out of 120,000 calls!

Just like the 19 photographs of the suicide hijackers, we never ask where those came from and how the FBI got them. The FBI admits there was not a single piece of paper to indicate the planning or knowledge of 9/11 but we are to believe that pictures of 19 hijackers sort of "turn up" very quickly after 9/11.

But people seem to begin their questions too far down the road, away from the initial and thoroughly incriminating points.

Wherever there is "planted" evidence it means the perpetrators have planted it to divert honest investigators. To investigate the planted evidence as though it is real is to miss the opportunity of catching the fix at the beginning. It is those who plant the evidence who are responsible for the crime.

The real perpetrators give themselves away by going directly to Luton to find their video. What are the chances of that? They went to Luton before there was any forensic investigation at the bomb sites. They were off to Luton even before they had removed all the body parts from the blasts - before they had any evidence that rucksacks were used to bring the bombs onto the trains - they were on their way to Luton to find the pictures of the lads carrying rucksacks and they found them.

yes indeed, you are 100% correct when you said, "The terrorists are the only people that killed in London.". Police shot dead and innocent man in cold blood - there are terrorists plain and simple.

The word terrorist is so abused as to become meaningless. When the state kills it is justified or tragic - but when 'terrorists' kill it is cowardly and senseless.

Why is the murder of civilians by the state any different from any other murder?

Our military are no different from any other terrorists
and 'our' cops are terrorists too.

Post a message about bombings; receive over 60 comments. Post a message about G8 riots. Get 100. Post one about some Italian chap shot dead by riot place, get 20. Watch conspiracists and pro-establishment minds slog it out all day.

Post a message about a massive humanitarian crisis in Niger needing urgent action. Get none.

It's a funny old game (The gospel according to Jimmy Greaves).

not at all Bob, just because a posting doesn't attract any comments don't mean that no one gives a shit.
Most people who make comments are not in agreement with the article posted and a vast majority are full of shit. I personally prefer it when no comments are added unless they add some more relevant information, links or other info. So just because you don't get a whole load of shit on your Niger article is not negative.
Less comments do not mean less interest. INNIT

english is not my language, sorry about mistakes.
First: I think we could try to express in a more accurate way: terrorism is not a proper word. Many acts are terrorist, but we should keep this word for a specifical situation: to make people to live in terror. But terror never is alone. If we think so, all becomes confuse, because the only explanation could be: the bombers are mad, or fanatics, or naif. In all this posibilities we can't undestand anything. An alternative explanation is: this is a war. In a war the acts of terrorism are usual. But an act of terrorism is not equal to an act of war. They are not the same. I think that we should try to see that england is in war, of course because of blair and others, but also because people lets them to do it. Not all the people, but not a few. The same in my country, the same all over the world. I can't express properly my sadness about simple people dying. Simple people in every part of the world.
Second: Let us get another way to understand and act. The enemy always are the state and its owners: the capitalists. This could sound oldfashioned but, althoug it is not a great concept, it is a simple true. Not more, but not less.The enemy are those people that began a war against simple people in all the world, like you and me. The government of england have declared a war to the world, like all the governments, of course. They are all our enemies and we must try to stop, not terrorism, but the war.
Therd: In my country terror war always an act of the state. Not always the state acts like a terrorist, but always is the state. In other words: The state and capitalism are always a problem, in a terrorist period or in a non-terrorist period. If we confuse state and terror, we could not understand the difference between one and the other, and we could fall easely in mistakes. We fight agains capitalism terrorist or not. We should try to fight war terrorist or not. And the only way to fight war in a country is fighting against the state and the capitalists of our country. This is the same for you, for us, and for everybody.
Stop the war.
Fight Blair and his people.
We are trying to do so in our countries, all over the world.

British Killer Cops trained in Israel
"Operation Kratos": London Met Police Special Operations Unit "Shoot to Kill"

Full Story:
 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20050724&articleId=732

The Israelification of Britain's police:
 http://www.gulfnews.com/Articles/WorldNF.asp?ArticleID=173220

The Reason for Suicide Bombers
 http://xymphora.blogspot.com/2005/07/reason-for-suicide-bombers.html

Israeli security forces advising the Metropolitan Police on how to deal with suicide bombers? Has the Commissioner been reading different news sources to me? The Israeli security forces don't have a particularly good record of dealing with suicide bombers (although they do have a conspicuous record of shooting innocent bystanders). Dialogue with the Palestinians has achieved a far greater reduction in suicide bombings than head-shots.

Britain's assassination squad:

 http://www.met.police.uk/so19/index.htm

Feeling safer yet? Thanks Mr. Bliar.

And in what way, pray, does the existence of an armed response unit - for, one might surmise, cases where the suspects are likely to be armed - equate directly to an "assassination" squad? Have you evidence that they assassinate people on some sort of regular basis? Are you quite clear on the meaning of "assassinate"?

Yes: 8 cowardly bullets to the back of the head of a prone, restrained man. Reminds me of occupied Palestine.

An interesting article I found -

 http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=6992

which I personally found more enlightening than kneejerk opinions about the war on terror...

So, Simon - what is it you learnt from Princess Michael of Kent's son-in-law?

 http://www.nriinternet.com/Section3Who/WhoEurope/UK/S_V/Taseer_married_Ella/

We can start off by noting that he went from being a "Time magazine trainee journalist" in January 05 to (according to Prospect) " a former "Time" reporter. He is now a freelance journalist" in July 05 - thats a pretty short career with Time - and one has to wonder who could possibly be jelping him keep body and soul together.

I bet he hardly ever dons his "Captain Condom" outfit any more either !!!!!

"I was reminded of Butt's cold hatred for Britain when a colleague of mine said that Beeston's younger generation were saying to her, a week after the London bombs, "Well what's the difference between al Qaeda and MI5 anyway?" and "It's sad people died, but what about the ones who died in Iraq?""

Help me out Simon - how does asking these questions indicate a "cold hatred for Britain?" Oh yes, and erm, do you have the answers?

He goes on:

"There it is again, the extra-national sentiment, in which no nation matters save the Islamic nation and its Arab culture. Butt spoke passionately about Arabia and wants to go there. "I believe the Arabic language will give me that key to have access to those things I don't have access to at the moment." Again, that yearning for Islam to fill the gaps in his own identity."

How comes I hear lots of white British people asking those questions? Are they too fans of the "Islamic nation". Certainly not all of them, I'm sure of that. Are they yearning to "fill the gaps in their own identity"?

And I have to stop here - I'm not reading any more of that article - cos its almost as if its been written by a member of Britain's ruling class ...........

That's interesting info on the author of the piece - I certainly didn't agree with his tone, and Prospect magazine has some dubious material in it. I thought the article was worthwhile as an illustration of the interviewee's mindset. I found it via a link at
 http://www.neildoyle.com
by the way.

SAS Was In London Underground:

 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,22989-1715880,00.html

It is horrendous to hear of reports about boming in London with connections in Leeds. I live in leeds and do good community work and this is at stake when certian interets choose to abotain thier way with this type of violence. The last thing we need is continued stigmitisation of community black or white, poor or rich.

The protests in Scotland were just about drawing attention to the deaths around the world casused by fear and corruption. We are lucky here in the UK that we have plenty of resource available to do things about those who choose to kill in the name of justice. However to many times those resource are only put into fuelling more fear more hatred and more distrust. When can this cycle end and when can those who chosse to kill in the name of justice choose to think about what and whom the harm, all of us.

The police are now looking at further limits to civel liberties and now seem go have ever more justification for the use of stop and search, the limitation of freedom of movement and the continued singleling out of groups or individual who are deamed dangerous wheather legitamaly or just perceived.

All though this type of event is horrifiying can these extremists be stopped when thier support is never challenged. Where does such hatred come from? people wish to find justification for thier acts can often find it quite easily when there is so much violence supplied to them from peope who are maginalise or by the athorities themselves.

Do we have a right to live with out fear of this type of repression. Should we now close our borders to whomever does not fit the requirments of a british citizen, who might not have the chossen beliefs or views deemed acceptable? And to ask the most dangerous question of all who does resposibility lie with for these type of acts, becasue if this is never found then we will never be free from such violence and our children will continue to die from hatred.

And the more dangerous if we export such hatred and violence how long is it before it gets back to our shores. Yes of cause those repsonsible should be held to account so that the killing can stop but without challengeing the promotion and export of vioence then war and terroism will continue. War is also terrosim human rights should be upheld and we need to contnuie to uphold our right to protest against terrorism.

Toby

Toby is right! Next it'll be the dyslexics! He'll be out the country before you can spell....well, anything, frankly.

Shame, it was a nice piece otherwise.