Criminals and real terrorists exist in government departments of all western countries, often the militarised or police ones. I hope they are all included in your "hunting down" comment Bugsy, because currently their terrorism and criminality is sanctioned in their respective states and protected by the governments in them.

Unpleasant goings-on, to be sure.

But terrorism is like that.

I'm not sure that I want to read the book, myself. I genuinely enjoyed The Satanic Verses, but then I do consider Rushdie to be an outstanding writer.

I can't help but think this isn't quite in the same class.

The publisher describes his reaction to it as "I was completely bowled over by the novel and the moving love story it portrays". Its author says "Anyone who reads the book will see that it honours the Prophet and his favourite wife", while a US professor-lady says "You can't play with a sacred history and turn it into softcore pornography"

Sounds more like a Barbara Cartland bodice-ripper than anything aimed at my demographic.

Nevertheless, I'm delighted the publishers are standing up to the terrorist tactics. Even more delighted that Mr Plod, so often portrayed as passive and complacent in the face of religious hanky-panky, may have nabbed the nutters already.

>>I presume the bit which makes your blood boil is the fact that these offenders sought to censor freedom using terrorism.<<

Yep.

>>It only takes a small number of determined people to influence a large number of ordinary folks. The Mafia system shows this, yet when it comes to a violent, agressive, seditious religion .. many people don't get it.<<

I wouldn't call it influence, Boaz. I would say "instil fear into". That is what terrorists do. That's what the IRA did. But even they found that it was a pretty blunt instrument when it came to influencing people to their cause - with the possible temporary exception of some Boston bar-flys, who mistook terrorism for freedom-fighting.

Terrorism creates fear, but it doesn't promote your cause very efficiently. It will only impress the already-disaffected.

The quickest way to escalate this into an all-out religious war is to pretend that one already exists. Which is why I dislike your rabble-rousing, Boaz. It can only be counterproductive.

Pericles,

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of the efficacy of terrorism. It seems to me that if you can scare a major publisher like Random House into dropping a book you are being very effective.

It now appears that the publisher, Martin Rynja, joins the ever growing list of people who require police protection because they have offended Muslim sensitivities. The list includes Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the Danish cartoonist, Kurt Westergard.

If the cost of offending Muslims is a life under permanent armed guard many people will choose silence.

Sometimes it appears that even governments can be terrorised into acting as censors. How else to explain the harassment of the Dutch cartoonist, Gregorius Nekschot?

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121581460304047109.html

From where I'm sitting terrorism seems to be quite successful

I agree, stevenlmeyer, if the intent is to terrorize, terrorism is very effective.

>>It seems to me that if you can scare a major publisher like Random House into dropping a book you are being very effective.<<

If, however, you are intending to extend your terrorism into areas that actually have an impact on targets other than individuals you dislike, it is a limited weapon.

While the IRA were active in the 1980s, individuals were definitely at risk. Political targets such as the Conservative Conference in Brighton, or shadow Northern Ireland secretary Airey Neave, as well as people sitting in pubs or eating in restaurants.

The fact remains that while this might have satisfied their desire to extend their religious wars into their perceived enemy's heartland, it ultimately did not convert anybody to their cause.

So it really depends whether the terrorists believe that knocking over individuals who upset them is constructive in terms of their overall objective.

What do you think?

Pericles,

You say >> “ .. depends whether the terrorists believe that knocking over individuals who upset them is constructive ...”

The effect of 9/11 has been to give massive impetus to the Islamo-Facist organisations. The videos of attacks on western targets are used to recruit new members and lift morale of their fighters.

Seems to me Osama bin Laden actively counted upon retaliation to encourage the mindset on Arab Street that the west was out to get them. Perhaps in this sense we played into his hands, although alternative courses of action were even less palatable.

Terrorism has worked wonders for the Taliban in their quest to retake Afghanistan. Those who oppose them are simply murdered until there is no one left to defy them.

It worked out very well during the Spanish Election, and the French were almost knocked out of the Afghan conflict by the casualties they took in one attack recently.

You seem to be under this mistaken belief that these Islamo-Facist organisations are interested in ruling by popular acclaim. They are not. These people are convinced of the righteousness of their cause and will fight to the end to see it implemented. They have the experience of the Middle East to show them that majority rules democracy is not necessary to rule a country, perhaps its not even desirable.

You say >> “The quickest way to escalate this into an all-out religious war is to pretend that one already exists”

Do you mean, when you say “all out religious war”, all muslims up in arms? Because those Islamo Facists already fighting are definitely engaged in an all out religious war.

I am not suggesting that the majority of Muslims are involved in this war, they are not. But lets stop pretending that it’s somehow our actions which are responsible for these Islamo-Facists or that we can somehow provoke them. They have an agenda which is outside our control and which needs to be eradicated ASAP.

Bending over and allowing this type of terrorism to succeed is tantamount to inviting the Islamo-Facists to continue

Fair enough as far as it goes, Paul.L, but you never quite get to the part that says how terrorism morphs into... what? Conquest? Rule? Subjugation?

>>The effect of 9/11 has been to give massive impetus to the Islamo-Facist organisations.<<

Given that 9/11 was seven years ago, this "massive impetus" has not been particularly evident. Our paranoia, on the other hand, has escalated beyond the terrorists wildest expectations.

>>Terrorism has worked wonders for the Taliban in their quest to retake Afghanistan.<<

I would personally suggest that guerrilla warfare would be a more accurate description.

This is an odd statement:

>>It worked out very well during the Spanish Election<<

What did it achieve, exactly? Nationwide domination? Increased influence over government policy? What?

>>the French were almost knocked out of the Afghan conflict by the casualties they took in one attack recently<<

As I said, I would regard this as more conventional fighting. It somehow doesn't compare with suicide bombing in a shopping centre.

>>These people are convinced of the righteousness of their cause and will fight to the end to see it implemented.<<

Now, that's the bit I don't understand. To see what implemented? How is the transition made between blowing up civilians in crowded bars, and some form of control over them?

>>They have the experience of the Middle East to show them that majority rules democracy is not necessary to rule a country, perhaps its not even desirable<<

OK, I'll bite. Where?

>>But lets stop pretending that it’s somehow our actions which are responsible for these Islamo-Facists or that we can somehow provoke them.<<

I'll buy that, so long as you recognize that by taking the whack-a-mozzie line, you are playing a perfect role in their recruitment propaganda. You make the ideal target - look, they despise us, these evil decadent westerners, join the jihad and become a martyr.

All that aside, I'd still like to hear how we are in greater danger than to be a potential victim of a random terrorist action.