Nick Cohen spews crap, again

[Vladimir]

The instinctive response of a significant portion of the rich world's intelligentsia to the murder of innocents on 11 September was anything but robust. A few, such as Karlheinz Stockhausen, were delighted. The destruction of the World Trade Centre was 'the greatest work of art imaginable for the whole cosmos,' declared the composer whose tin ear failed to catch the screams.

<snip>

In these bleak days, it's worth remembering what was said after September 2001. A backward glance shows that before the war against the Taliban and long before the war against Saddam Hussein, there were many who had determined that 'we had it coming'. They had to convince themselves that Islamism was a Western creation: a comprehensible reaction to the International Monetary Fund or hanging chads in Florida or whatever else was agitating them, rather than an autonomous psychopathic force with reasons of its own. In the years since, this manic masochism has spread like bindweed and strangled leftish and much conservative thought.

<snip>

'Hang your head in shame, Mr Blair. Better still, resign - and whoever takes over immediately withdraw all our forces from Iraq and Afghanistan,' wrote the Rev Mike Ketley, who is a vicar, for God's sake, but has no qualms about leaving Afghanistan to the Taliban and al-Qaeda or Iraq to the Baath party and al-Qaeda. 'Let's stop this murder and put on trial those criminals who are within our jurisdiction,' began Patrick Daly of south London in an apparently promising letter to the Independent. But, inevitably, he didn't mean the bombers. 'Let's start with the British government.'

<snip>

Again, I understand the appeal. Whether you are brown or white, Muslim, Christian, Jew or atheist, it is uncomfortable to face the fact that there is a messianic cult of death which, like European fascism and communism before it, will send you to your grave whatever you do. But I'm afraid that's what the record shows.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,1525172,00.html

Actually, I am being slightly unkind - he has half a point. It is certainly true that there are terrorist groups out there that seek destruction for destruction's sake. But Cohen's precious war against "cults of death" is still a cover story for imperialism, and is still how we got into this mess in the first place. And it plays right into the extremist's hands...

[mr blur]

1. Agreed. A "Dinner Party" Socialist ranting about

"Dinner Party" Socialists. And yes, he has half a point.

[T_i_B]

2. What I find really amusing about Cohen....

...is that he was vehemently opposed to the war in Afghanistan and then all of a sudden he did a complete U-turn and became a massive hawk on Iraq. I can remember articles he did in the aftermath of 9/11 with titles such as "why it is right to be anti-American" and the article below. Funny that he has changed his views so much since then.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,587483,00.html

[trebizond]

4. I think he was just wants to be seen as an iconoclast-

-and be the talk of the very London middle-class liberal circles that he bitches about. He's probably right that such people have a masochistic streak, and he's pandering to it himself, in the hope of turning himself into a sort of minor-league Chris Hitchens. Unfortunately, he totally lacks any of the wit that Hitch wraps his drunken ramblings in, so he's probably on to a loser.

But then I've never liked Cohen myself, always found him unbearably self-righteous. I suppose what's most jaw-dropping is that he's still just as self-righteous, even now he's exposed himself as an utter hypocrite. But then, those two traits are hardly uncommon partners.

[T_i_B]

7. I've tended to find with Cohen...

...that he veers between writing excellent articles and writing crap. However, since he decided that invading Iraq was a good thing his articles have been crap far more often then previously was the case.

[LeftishBrit]

3. Yes, half a point...

Yes, Islamism, like all forms of theocracy, is dangerous - as perhaps Reagan et al should have considered before backing the forerunners of the Taliban because they were against the Soviets.

Yes, Bush and Blair were not directly responsible for last week's violence. Yes, it was inexcusable.

But none of that justifies the war in Iraq, and the unnecessary deaths of thousands of Iraqi civilians; or denies the fact that if you play with fire near a powder-keg, it's likely to result in disaster. Or that Blair has helped to make us into a target - and for no sensible reason!

[fedsron2us]

5. I do not understand Mr Cohen's logic

How did overthrowing a secular tyrant like Saddam Hussein protect humanity from an 'Islamicist death cult' ? It seems that it has had the opposite effect.Perhaps his conscience is hurting him after last weeks events. Of course in reality Islamic extremism, like Christian millenarianism or fascist ideologies, has existed for a long time. However, it is only able to flourish when the conditions are right. The policies pursued by Bush and Blair in the Middle East are exactly what it needs to grow.

[Vladimir]

6. Indeed

adn what he especially doesn't get, it seems to me, is that the instinct to go after our own criminals is precisely the right one. If we as a people cannot persecute the lying war criminals who purport to represent us, how can we lecture the rest of the world on its reactionary leaders?