Seed

[poliphilo]

Fanatics like to be persecuted. It confirms them in their sense of their own importance, gives them publicity and draws disciples. And it proves what they were saying all along about the state being unjust and wicked.

The early Christians- who were fanatics of Al-Qaida-like intensity (the accusation that they were behind the burning of Rome in AD 64 is entirely plausible) courted persecution. Tertullian, who was as keen on martyrdom as any Islamicist, spelled out the logic, "The oftener we are mown down by you, the more in number we grow; the blood of Christians is seed."

He was right.

The Blair government is responding to the current terror campaign by curtailing the human rights of Muslim extremists. It's a populist move, guaranteed to win the favour of the right-wing papers. As a liberal I'm against it. I think our respect for human rights is what makes us better than our enemy. But more than that, I think it's dumb.

Comments

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

Forcing the preachers of hatred underground is only going to make the work of the security services even harder than it already is.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

Right, but at the same time I see the need to move against the largest risks and that doing so might have moved operations deeper underground anyhow. It may be a toss up where it is impossible to know what the best plan of action is. I see both as being viable and I think you can make the argument on either side that it is the most "cautious" strategy.

It also depends on what they know about the network... after all, everytime a major raid happens, the terrorism networks could start talking and revealing their identities. But I have no idea whatsoever.