Wednesday, July 20, 2005

World: London Bombings and Journalism

I really hate the increasing number of places being targetted, the oddest was murder in Netherland last year, by terroists. But it does give rise to good journalism, thoughts, ideas and opinions which bring forward the real issues, which are far, far away from what the terroists think these are. Excellent example would be this Telegraph piece. There were two good pieces at The Straits Times, which is by subscription ( Who gave them this idea? The only really successful subscription based online publication is WSJ and it is light years behind it). First one talked about instilling fear in people as the intent and how the effect of London bombings seemed so less compared to 9/11. The London was back in business much faster and none of the motives seemed to have succeded. The second was regarded reason and came back to the murder I mentioned in the first line. Theo Van Gogh tried to reason with his killers which of course was not successful. The articled pointed out to people saying Why us, Why now. The simple answer is this set of people are totally beyong reason and any attempt to apply logic will end in futility. I am not saying good or bad justification but any plausible reason for the actions. There simple are not any.

I was sort of fan of Tony Blair before this. Maybe, because of quality of his Trans-Atlantic counterpart. But he refused to say that attacks are because Britain (or is it England?) participated in Iraq war. It is so bloody obvious, his refusal to say so seemed so superfluous than his vociferous justification for war before and after the Iraq mis-adventure. Why not say something which is so obvious to everyone. Politics is so difficult to understand for simple folk like me :)


Post a Comment

<< Home