BBC BLOGS - Newsnight: From the web team
« Previous | Main | Next »

Tuesday 3 May 2011

Sarah McDermott | 11:55 UK time, Tuesday, 3 May 2011

Tonight our Diplomatic editor Mark Urban will be asking where the killing of al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden by US forces leaves the war on terror. We'll speak live to George W Bush's Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.

We have the first in a series of films hearing testimony from people who were caught up in the 7/7 bombings in London in 2005, and we'll debate if there is now an increased risk of further terrorist attacks here in the UK following Bin Laden's death.

Paul Mason is in Cairo and has been considering how the Arab Spring fits into the story. Where is the Arab world facing politically now and might a less brutal face of political Islam emerge? Read more on Paul's blog.

Matt Frei is in Washington where he asks people how the extraordinary events of yesterday have changed the public perception of President Barack Obama and will it propel him to a second term?

And Iain Watson reports on the confrontation between the energy secretary and the prime minister at a cabinet meeting over the No campaign's claims in the alternative vote referendum. George Osborne reportedly told Chris Huhne that the Cabinet was no place for a "Jeremy Paxman interview".

However, 10:30 BBC Two is. Join Jeremy then.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    Nobody believes it .

    Same with 9/11 .

  • Comment number 2.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 3.

    HOLD IT FLASH BANG WALLOP - WHAT NO PICTURE? (Blogdog-proofed)

    "As Osama was about to bite the dust, the man with the cameraaa saaaaaaid . . ."

    In passing: Did we all hear Dave () Humphries over 'multi-counted votes'? Dave's juvenile, () credentials were on show like never before (even in his purported 'dual NO campaign' calumny) and he made it oh so depressingly clear that

    WE HAVE GOT OURSELVES ANOTHER ONE.

    Dave had so many cases to answer, that poor () Humphries could not keep up with the obfuscation, prevarication, elision, segues and () dodging. Then Dave spotted his chance, and na na na-na naaad over the rest of the 'interview'. Class.

    Cameron is (). He is the epitome of Westminster distillation. From the coalition of () - if I HAD to choose - the latter would be far preferable. Proof, if proof were needed, of a dumb electorate; we need a Certificate of Voting Competence to eliminate the Cameron/Clegg/Brown/Blair/Major/Thatcher TENDENCY. Need I say:

    SPOILPARTYGAMES

  • Comment number 4.

    the chat rooms are full of doubts....after the passport found in the rubble of 9/11 can you blame them?

  • Comment number 5.

    WHEN IS PHOTOGRAPHIC PROOF NOT PHOTOGRAPHIC PROOF?

    Much discussion on the News Channel regarding 'photographic proof' that Bin Laden is Dead.

    I am reminded of 'Double-Dave' in the 2010 election

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2010/01/06/stick-your-poster-cam-115875-21945618/

    One of the two Daves has never been seen again. Is he dead? Is he hiding in a virtual cave?

    If we are presented with a Bin Laden-like image, will it be any more convincing than - say - a COPY OF A BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

  • Comment number 6.

    FIRST HAND TESTIMONY OF 7/7 - QUITE RIGHT TOO.

    But, from the BBC, we get no first hand testimony of 9/11. That testimony would be of serial explosions and flashes of light, UNRELATED TO THE PLANE IMPACTS, but related to the THREE collapses. That would never do. Report truth, and you will be labelled 'Truther' - or worse - 'Gilligan'.

    https://rememberbuilding7.org/

  • Comment number 7.

    OBL's death is irrelevant to the operational situation in Afghanistan.

    But how did we get here in the first place?

    Through some pretty crass politics on the part of George Bush, if the truth be told.

    The War on Terror has a pretty dubious origin anyway - 9/11 was carried out by Al-Qaeda sponsored terrorists, but the USA then decided to invade Iraq - which seemed a decidely strange response at the time because Saddam Hussein was without doubt the very sort of Arab tyrant Al-Qaeda wanted to topple and he wouldn't have given them house room and "dealt with" any members who crossed his path - Saddam's problem as that he outsmarted Bush Senior and Bush Junior wanted to even the score.

    When Bush invaded Al-Qaeda then piled into Iraq to exploit the vaccuum created by toppling Saddam, forming alliances with which ever insurgents would play ball, pumping Jihaddis into the country and formenting attacks on the coalition forces. The Iraq invasion acted as a massive diversion from directly seeking out Al-Qaeda and a wonderful opportunity for them to attack US ground forces, which they did to great effect.

    Yes the Taliban in Afghanistan accommodated Al-Qaeda and shared many of their values, but following the coalition invasion there it made no sense for Al-Qaeda to go on using Afghanistan for training camps as all this did was expose their fighters to interdiction by the coalition - so their bases moved out to Yemen, Somalia, etc.

    That leaves the coalition fighting insurgents who are a rag, tag & bobtail of warlords, jihaddis, Taliban of several flavours, plus other fundamentalists from Pakistani tribal areas - there are very few out-and-out Al-Qaeda left there.

    Given that the coalition is winning the IED war now with better tactics, weapons and intelligence plus winning over significant sections of Afghan communites - not surprising as 80% of IED casualites are civilians - the very last thing we should do now is view OBL's death as changing anything on the ground in Afghanistan - it doesn't.

    What it may do is convince wavering communities that Al-Qaeda is a spent force in their country - and by implication, so are their allies the Taliban.

    What the west should be doing now is to identify and target Al-Qaeda's new training bases and prevent the whole sorry story replaying in the failed and failing states in Africa, as well as ensuring that the arab awakening doesn't provide a smokescreen for Al-Qaeda to do exaclty what they did in Iraq all over again.

    The West crassly believed that "my enemy's enemy is my friend"

  • Comment number 8.

  • Comment number 9.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 10.


    Benazir Bhutto: Bin Laden was Murdered
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnychOXj9Tg&feature=related

  • Comment number 11.

    "Proof" in the hi-tech, CSI-age seems no better, and possibly even worse in some ways, as who verifies the what are still subject to 'influence'.

    Not everything can be resolved like a remake of Rising Sun.

    https://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/farid/research/digitaltampering/

    On who to believe, I simply err on assessing the media savvy of those who might have a vested interest in a credible Mark Twainesque postcard not turning up at today's equivalent of the New York Sun.

    But then, if it isn't 'live', enough can remain in doubt or down to pre-preparation that this of course need not mean much either.

  • Comment number 12.

    Most of those that died in 9/11 tragedy worked for an investment bank...and bin Laden was identified as the the biggest terrorist after the event!

    Strange world!

  • Comment number 13.

    It would appear that the eco-fascists ( as spearheaded by Chris Huhne ) are desperate to get a YES result in the AV referendum, but why are Newsnight apparently still focusing on the Bin Laden propaganda train ?

  • Comment number 14.

    AV is considered by war-monger Cameron as 'expensive'...this is the bloke that committed us to yet another war in the MENA territory without a single democratic vote being cast. It certainly makes me think twice about the definition of expensive!

    Perhaps he's not referencing it in financial terms!

  • Comment number 15.

    #14

    Which ever way you look at it AV is going to cost more to count votes two or three times at least, and we can probably wave bye-bye to the traditional tension of early morning election results into their fools bargain !

  • Comment number 16.

    UNWARRANTED ATTRIBUTION (#13)

    BBC never miss a chance to attribute 9/11 to Bin Laden. How long before they report 45 MINUTE headlines as the 'Wake up call that saved Britain'?

    J'accuse! The BBC are avoiding comment on a majority-wish, in USA, for a PROPER ENQUIRY into the destruction of NOT TWO, BUT THREE towers, on 9/11. Now why might they do that? Cui Bono.

  • Comment number 17.

    Look !

    When are you going to get it ? its up, the game is up, I'm talking to you lot at the BBC. The longer you go on the more you're looking a laughing stock, its just so embarrassing now I can barely watch; totally cringe inducing.

  • Comment number 18.

    And its the bankers and you lot looked the other way to a vast crime. How can you do that ? HOW ? You're all known . I mean where is shame ?

  • Comment number 19.

  • Comment number 20.

    #7: good analysis richard, but for once i think you miss the point of some of the planners.

    first of all, there was never any intention to "win" the war in Afghanistan, after all the real rulers of America have made $Tns from the war, the purchases of arms from their corporate factories etc. The same was true of Iraq, but i disagree with your reasoning about the "causes" of Iraq - in fact Bush Sr deliberately kept Saddam in power, by forcefully preventing the Shia uprising at the end of GW1. The sanctions were to punish the *people* of Iraq (for rising up against Saddam!), not to harm Saddam in any way - which of course the sanctions didn't.

    OBL's death might change some things, but it is unlikely. The organisation he headed was involved in major development projects, such as highways in Sudan etc, and he was utterly opposed to the corruption of the Islamic world. It is doubtful his heirs in the organisation will be any different.

    as to whether we will experience another terrorist attack - that all depends upon MI5 and the Govt, if they believe another such attack will re-enable a faltering War on Islam, or improve their standing in an upcoming election, then it is possible we WILL see another attack. Lets "cut the [bleep]", 7/7 was a false flag operation, with a British Intelligence operative running a bunch of imbecilic wannabe-muslims to cause terror - and deflect attention from the failures of the Gleneagles summit. It is not just the Americans who cannot trust most of their State apparatus, although i am also sure there are many decent and honourable people who work with British Intelligence who would be absolutely appalled at such activities.

    the vast majority of terror attacks planned in the UK have been prevented by the Muslim communities themselves reporting them. Unless Muslim rights and communities are deliberately targeted in the UK (as they have been since 9/11, at varying levels), this prevention of terrorism by English-Muslim Communities will probably continue.


    "What it may do is convince wavering communities that Al-Qaeda is a spent force in their country - and by implication, so are their allies the Taliban."

    Al Qaeda was a US set-up and trained 'guerrilla force' to both hound the Russians, and also train the Taliban/Northern Alliance in resistance techniques. The Taliban were a bunch of fanatical orphans trained in Pakistani, Saudi-funded schools (madras), and most of them are long dead. The large part of the current Taliban are the resistance fighters opposing continued Western presence - and they are fully aware that the West wants out, all they have to do is give the appearance the resistance is faltering, thus Karzai's incredibly corrupt regime can continue. Remember that international observers of the last Afghan election openly stated that the elections were rigged upon EVERY level and district - and that the opium/heroin trade is largely controlled by Western forces. Or how many bearded Taliban have you seen bringing heroin into the UK, and pushing it on the streets?

    in other words, as so often, reality is almost a mirror image of what we are told is "true". But at this point, despite the horrors of the Taliban regaining control of Afghanistan, it is quite likely most Afghans would prefer THEM to the continued military presence and corruption of the Karzai stooge. Unfortunately, after 10 years of warfare, the spending of incredible amounts of money (the UK alone has spent well over £20Bn, probably more like twice that amount now, purely on Afghanistan), and uncounted (LITERALLY uncounted) thousands of dead Afghan civilians, it is unlikely that anything positive has come from this war.

    before the war, Afghans were the most pro-Western of any Islamic nation, and desperately poor. They are still desperately poor, but are no longer under any illusions as to the beneficial nature of Western foreign policy. Oh, and they had NO hand whatsoever in the attack on 9/11, nor, it is likely, did OBL.

    in fact, there is little doubt that in the Terrorism stakes, the West comes absolutely head-and-shoulders above ANY Muslim group, no matter some of them are very unattractive characters indeed.

    so how will OBL's death affect anything? Probably nothing at all, except IF the UK's rulers are worried the UK population needs another boost of "Minute of Hate", it might be trotted out as an explanation afterwards.


    #9: think i've had enough of alex jones' paranoia and disinformation for a while, brossen. Frankly, *anyone* who took the whole 'birth-certificate' media-blitz on board is highly suspicious. And he rings my 'BS-Detectors' constantly. Yuck.


    "And Iain Watson reports on the confrontation between the energy secretary and the prime minister at a cabinet meeting over the No campaign's claims in the alternative vote referendum. George Osborne reportedly told Chris Huhne that the Cabinet was no place for a "Jeremy Paxman interview". "

    in an ideal world, the Cabinet would be no place for a George Osborne!! Wish the little toad would come onto QT and actually face the Public with his intentions - or as much as he could be forced to admit them, honesty not being one of his strong suits, i expect. Its not like the political hack (he is NOT an economist!) is doing anything worthwhile at the Treasury, i's certain his staff could spare him the few hours to appear. They'd probably get a whip-around to pay for the cab, in fact! ;D

  • Comment number 21.

    brossen99

    You use the words Nazi and fascist indiscriminately to smear those you don't like.

    Do you know what the Nazis were or what fascists did, or why the terms are so pejorative? The private armies, the mass imprisonment, beating up and murder of opponents and their families, and so on. How does this apply to Mr Huhne (whom you have accused) for example?

    I know about these things partly because they happened to members of my family and to families of friends. Your UNTRUTHS cheapen what happened to them, and you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself!! In future I shall refer your comments of this nature to the moderator, unless you furnish proof!

  • Comment number 22.

    Brozen99 and Sasha...

    Or maybe the term 'Nazi' was used by Conservatives like Churchill in order to give socialism a bad name? The more we cite Hitler (and Stalin) as bad guys, the more likely we are to undermine our own welfare state and our care for each other.

    In doing that we are more likely to let people referred to as corporate nazis, make more money out of the vulnerable. To stop that, we have to collectively cease vilifying the major historical movements of socialism in Germany and the USSR in the first part of the c20th. The alternative, I fear, is that prices will just continue to go up (inflation) and most people's standard of living will just keep falling as the unscrupulous profit from the absence of effective state regulation (ala Krugman et al).

  • Comment number 23.

    FERVENT PRAYER

    May Newsnight never have the opportunity to apply its uniquely crass embellishment to any misfortune that may befall me or mine.

  • Comment number 24.

  • Comment number 25.

    YUP! (#24)

    I note the UN exists in a vacuous near-vacuum.

  • Comment number 26.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 27.

    Obamas credibility may be on the line with the way this Bin Laden story unfolds.
    The spokes-mouth at the white house stuttered and stumbled through the revised events at the Bin laden high-walled compound; I'm surprised he kept a straight face whilst trotting this stuff out. I actually want to believe what we are getting told from out of the Whitehouse.. but straight off the bat this story has sounded crazy - okey, I'm a born cynic. I'd like to hear more critical thinking by the way, you know, from the mainstream media. Mark Urbans comments at least went some way to thinking outside of the bubble that other reporters usually come from.

    Anyhow, I'd like to give credit to Obama, the intelligence agencies, the military and the navy seals if what we are told is true...pictures would be welcome though, in fact pictures are critical or this could backfire on Obama...who, by the way is a Leninist-Marxist with a dodgy Birth Certificate with a staple gun from his community activist days in Chicargo hidden under the floor boards at the Oval office. Clinton and Biden are always joking about it. Next time you have them on Newsnight, ask about the staple gun.

  • Comment number 28.

    Choudray: i am a pacifist, a life-long pacifist, but if i could have jumped through the screen tonight i would have pounded his face. So God help me.

    here is his resume:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anjem_Choudary


    "Choudary has been largely criticised by most UK newspapers, some of whom describe him as an extremist. In January 2010 Guardian contributor Mehdi Hasan wrote: "Is Choudary an Islamic scholar whose views merit attention or consideration? No. Has he studied under leading Islamic scholars? Nope. Does he have any Islamic qualifications or credentials? None whatsoever. So what gives him the right to pontificate on Islam, British Muslims or 'the hellfire'? Or proclaim himself a 'sharia judge'?", and claimed that Choudary was "as unrepresentative of British Muslim opinion, as he is of British anti-war opinion."".

    this man is no scholar, this man is nothing but an MI5 puppet, who has been allowed - even encouraged! to remain in the UK and continue speaking his rhetoric of division.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2796335/Hate-cleric-Anjem-Choudary-on-25k-benefits.html

    why has Choudary been allowed to remain here, yet other Muslim British Citizens were kidnapped and tortured?

    https://www.guantanamo.org.uk/content/view/133/40/


    why is this man even allowed to pretend he is an Islamic scholar, or even to teach? He does not even know, let alone understand, the sacred words of the Qoran. Here is a discussion ALL of the students and followers of this western-puppet should read carefully - if they have the attention span. I recall watching the ISLAM4UK group on a NN report, and thinking how incredibly stupid and uneducated they were. Listening to Choudray tonight, i realised WHY they were uneducated, and incredibly ignorant of Islam, let alone UK culture. So WHO benefits from having a pretend Muslim scholar breeding up potential terrorists?

    it sure as hell isn't the largely peaceful English muslim communities. Please read:

    https://www.gawaher.com/index.php?showtopic=42279&st=0

    why is he still in the country? And more to the point, regarding his complete lack of knowledge of the Qoran, WHY is he still called "Islamic" by the media??? The other guy was infinitely more knowledgeable than Choudray - and was very happy over the popular movements for Freedom throughout the region. This wasn't a case of "Good Muslim v Bad Muslim", it was a case of "Good Muslim v Not-a-Muslim-really". Choudray has clearly ever even heard of Ijtihad, which directly contradicts his statements that Islam is monolithic and unchanging: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijtihad

    and i am not even a Muslim, let alone a Sheik. I can imagine after Choudray's performance earlier, the national bandwidth will be filled by Muslim condemnations of his words, and a recognition that not only can his words divide us, but that they are also completely untrue, with regards to Islam. And he is certainly NOT the only one criticising the various occupations in the Middle East.


    bin laden: i am sorry if i gave an earlier different impression, but OBL *was* a worldwide terrorist, who helped organise and fund many terrorist atrocities, especially in Bali and also the earlier attack on the WTC. I do think the (mainly) Sauds and others went to the US to participate in SOME terrorist attack, which was subverted once inside the US, by lets say an "unnamed group" for their own ends. He also ran a construction company in the Sudan, educating and recruiting through that region - whilst also bringing good quality roads and jobs.

    President Obama has done what the Republicans completely failed to do: remove this terrorist. He may or may not have been involved in the 9/11 attacks*, but he was a terrorist anyway. Although i do NOT agree with the principle of assassinations, State sponsored or otherwise!

    *https://www.utopia-politics.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30445

  • Comment number 29.

    some might find this article by Robert Fisk illuminating, regarding some recent story-telling:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/history-for-centuries-weve-been-liberating-the-middle-east-why-do-we-never-learn-599792.html


    #22: "Or maybe the term 'Nazi' was used by Conservatives like Churchill in order to give socialism a bad name?"

    no.

    National Socialism is *very* different from Socialism, in most regards. Both reduce liberal Individual freedoms, but Socialism at least has a conscience! And "Nazism" refers to the name of the Party Hitler was the front for - NOT named by Churchill at all. So it is unlikely on both counts.


    "The more we cite Hitler (and Stalin) as bad guys, the more likely we are to undermine our own welfare state and our care for each other."

    the more we let the condemn(ed) coalition get away with the cuts, the more likely we are to undermine our own Welfare State. Get your priorities right. :/


    "In doing that we are more likely to let people referred to as corporate nazis, make more money out of the vulnerable. To stop that, we have to collectively cease vilifying the major historical movements of socialism in Germany and the USSR in the first part of the c20th. The alternative, I fear, is that prices will just continue to go up (inflation) and most people's standard of living will just keep falling as the unscrupulous profit from the absence of effective state regulation (ala Krugman et al).".

    an interesting summation, but one i fear flawed. Firstly, there is no reason to turn to either Socialism and certainly not Fascism, when all is needed is tighter regulations, punishment for bankers and corporate tax-avoiders. There is no need to put all power in the hands of Central-Planners, nor into Nazi hands to achieve this. Thankfully, i might add, with the enjoyment of Freedom-of-Speech, and Freedom-of-Religious-Conscience, that *Liberalism* gives. The politics of extremists *divides* us, just like that Choudray on NN tonight. However, having said that, i can imagine he united quite a few people against his divisive talk tonight! I think most in the UK enjoy the freedoms that living in a Liberal Democracy brings with it, and they are already dismayed at the erosion of those Liberties over the last few years, they don't want to lose more of them.


    #26: - "The greens are an exact mirror image of the German Nazis, the only thing different is that the real greens have got it in for all low income people. Their plan is to freeze and starve low income people to death".

    "DARN YOU WIKILEAKS!!!!!!!" X(

    so *that's* why the Greens don't support the Living Wage, job creation, and investment in new energy sources! It all falls into place now...


    "The Geeens are a Trojan horse for what has become Corporate Nazism, thats how Hitler got in in Germany starting with support from the wandervogel."

    Luckily, those plucky fellows and lasses of the condemned(ed) coalition are standing in the way of the Green's privatising what is left of the Welfare State to those multi-national corporations, every member of the coalition is fighting tooth-and-nail to prevent 'privatisation by the back-door' methods such as private providers of management services, pushed by the evil Greens upon an unsuspecting Public. The most odious policy, of course, is the Green's insistence that Corporates and Bankers would leave if they were required to pay a decent share of the tax burden, and attempting to reduce the rate of Corporation Tax as quickly and steeply as possible. The condemn(ed) coalition has done sterling work to avoid these Green policy suggestions, because clearly, the Greens are the Corporate Nazi Party. It couldn't be more obvious. Cheers!!

  • Comment number 30.

    btw, despite the increase in 'drone' attacks under Obama, and the still non-closing of Guantamo base, it can so far be said of him that he has not yet deliberately started a war for his own profit.

    https://www.utopia-politics.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=7656

    and for that we could be grateful, for an enormous *increase* in the number of terrorists came as a result of George W Bush's wars:

    https://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/headlines05/0717-01.htm

  • Comment number 31.

    PUZZLED AGAIN (#27)

    The helicopters arrived amid usual din, yet

    1) the residence-occupants seem not to have withdrawn to any kind of defendable room; yet the structure was purpose-built in the 1990s, then modified.
    2) Bin Laden - 'man of the gun' - had no weapon to hand.

    You might almost believe these people were not alert, and fearful of an attack, by MILITARY FORCE, and - relying on high walls for general safety - they assumed the noise was someone else's problem, choosing to remain in their bedrooms.

    Why does 'America' always employ a bad plot-line and a rubbish screenplay? It brings to mind Hollywood and Diehard movies. Ah - hold that thought - perhaps it should.

    And finally: Tony's dossier was a weird, unprecedented concept - to sell a lie. I found the photos of Obama and Friends, watching their personal Diehard movie EQUALLY WEIRD.

    Nuff sed?

  • Comment number 32.

    THE PERVERSE APE LOVES PERVERSITY FOR ITS OWN SAKE

    Much has been said in recent times of the psychopath leader.

    In my business life, I certainly knew men who were perverse for the sheer HELL of it, and added risk-of-detection (unconsciously, in my view) to spice it up.
    With the arrival of the 'global mentality' I suspect the reckless audacity of such individuals, has expanded to fit the arena available.

    Unfortunately, with speech-writers and autocues, the words are no clue to the man and his thoughts. But watch the body language: the eyes and blink-rate; the swagger; the tilt of head; and wonder what we are 'in for'.

  • Comment number 33.

    'National Socialism is *very* different from Socialism, in most regards. Both reduce liberal Individual freedoms, but Socialism at least has a conscience! And "Nazism" refers to the name of the Party Hitler was the front for - NOT named by Churchill at all. So it is unlikely on both counts.'

    National socialism is different to international socialism. One is Fabian/statist/caring and the other is cosmopolitan/anarchistic/predatory.

    Did you know that the word Nazi is just an abbreviated form of the German word Nationalsozialist (i.e National Socialist)

  • Comment number 34.

    'an interesting summation, but one i fear flawed. Firstly, there is no reason to turn to either Socialism and certainly not Fascism, when all is needed is tighter regulations, punishment for bankers and corporate tax-avoiders. There is no need to put all power in the hands of Central-Planners, nor into Nazi hands to achieve this.'

    But I can't see any tighter regulation or punished bankers or corporations being made to pay more tax!
    https://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/apr/11/lloyds-sell-more-branches-banking-commission

    Why do you think the Germans in late 1920's/early 1930's were in favour of an autocratic national socialist leader? What were the circumstances that Germany experienced during the 1920's. Are they similar to the circumstances we find ourselves in today? What did an autocratic leader offer that the other parties could not? - Leadership perhaps?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Program

  • Comment number 35.

    how can the Americans dive into a sovereign country and assassinate a Saudi national without the host country knowing nothing about it? How can a multi-millionairre who the CIA employed in it's covert war against the soviets in Afghanistan in 1978/9 not defend himself at the Hague and tell us where all the bodies are buried, the same applied to Saddam Hussein so who comes out of all this smelling of roses? Not the Americans, I'll wager...

  • Comment number 36.

    VAMPIRES HAVE NO REFELCTION AND PSYCHOPATHS NO SENSE OF SMELL? (#35)

    Now I ponder it - I suppose psychopaths rarely reflect on their works. Well: not in a rational way; just the memoirs.

  • Comment number 37.

    20. #9: think i've had enough of alex jones' paranoia and disinformation for a while,

    without offering the link - there is a new theory around that Alex Jones is the front man for the conspiracists. That is in keeping with the conspiracy that he peddles - that the conspiracists deliberately dangle evidence of the NWO in front of us.

    NWO and 9/11 conspiracy is no longer a specialist perspective. very ordinary people are full of it these days. I think the 'game' of working out the clues is a massive distraction from serious understanding and critique.

    21. In future I shall refer your comments of this nature to the moderator

    Please don't. It is distrubing enough having to deal with a moderation process that is neither transparent nor consistent. Much better that we know what perspective someone posts from. I have requested someone, can't remember who, to not use the ludicrous comparisons but as with conspiracies, the H comparison is pervasive - a public commentator on TV last night compared OBL to H (and was immediately criticised). I think it is ridiculous to keep the name of such a tyrant alive in this way. So many people suffered - 20 million Russians, millions of starving Europeans, Polish government destroyed and the counrty occupied for decades - Polish history is one of the most tragic I have heard about. I think they had 20 years in the last century when they weren't occupied by an autocracy. We went to war to save them and could only save ourselves by selling them out. When they finally re-found freedom, the whole pent-up frustration of squashed Britons was vented on them simply because they have no melanin.

  • Comment number 38.

    34. What did an autocratic leader offer that the other parties could not? - Leadership perhaps?

    I think that is true at this time. Jonathan Dimbleby's series on Russia clearly showed that the people he spoke to wanted a strong leadership, Chinese students interviewed in America softly explained a similar perception, even Cameron's appeal to 'muscular liberalism' is a sign of the times. We are in the final stages of the civilisation game - consolidating territories and working out rules of engagement for the co-existence of about five or six surviving civilisations. Isn't evolution great? I'm glad I didn't write that book about 'the end of history', probably more insight in astrology!

  • Comment number 39.

    21. In future I shall refer your comments of this nature to the moderator

    Please don't. Millions died in WWII, all over Europe, North Africa and the Far East. And I have also criticised this pervasive tendency to make irrelevant comparisons. But far better that we see what standpoint posters adopt than to erode further our freedoms of expression.

  • Comment number 40.

    Just caught up with Jeremy on BBCi Player! What a corker of a show :o) From Anjem Choudury (can't believe he's given a platform to spread his hate on the Beeb) to the rest. For the doubters - there is a Bin Laden death video on the web which was first broadcast by a Pakistani channel and a picture of Bin Laden shown on Sky News :p
    If you look on the net you'll find it.

  • Comment number 41.

    Excellent return of Jeremy :o) particularly with the Choudary v Hargey debate on Bin Laden.

 

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.