Suicide bombers? revisited...

I posted a couple of questions on this Guardian online debate. Awaiting interesting responses...

The Mail online also, I've noticed, says the bombers were carrying "holdalls" and not "rucksacks". This reinforces my suggestion that we should not dismiss the possibility that the bombers set out with a different scenario in mind to what actually happened. They could have been trying to converge somewhere (as suggested in my previous post) or even headed for other mainline stations (eg Paddington, Liverpool St., Waterloo and Victoria). Of course, the police could have evidence to the contrary...

Why does this matter, though? It seems to me that the "mastermind" was not just trying to shock us - perhaps into questioning our involvement in Iraq - but also trying to do this in a particular way. He wants us to believe there are bombers in our midst. He wants to create a backlash against the Muslim community in this country and, indeed throughout Europe and around the world. The fanatics are not going to wipe out the rest of us simply by blowing us up. One of their objectives is to recruit more fanatics, by provoking a reaction against Muslims, which itself radicalises more young people... The majority of us are reacting - perhaps instinctively - in the best way, by showing that the Muslim community in this country is part of a larger community. The last thing the fanatics want is a successful multicultural society. They want to encourage the extremist minority, such as in the BNP, who are already trying to capitalise on the 7/7 atrocity to increase their support.

So the mastermind deliberately used British citizens in this attack, to show us that there are terrorists living amongst us. He even made sure the bombers were easily traced, by ensuring id was found at the sites of the explosions. This was a risk on his part, as in terms of his safety and that of the rest of the network, the trail is less cold than it would have been otherwise. Our instinctive reaction is the right one, but it would perhaps be more effective if we had more awareness of the psychological warfare that is taking place, of the sort of reactions the terrorists are trying to provoke.

It would be even more effective if we could show that the mastermind had cut corners in his desire to send the message he did. The message - and perhaps even future recruitment by the fanatics - would be undermined if it turned out to be the case that the bombers (or even one of them) thought they were on a mission that was something other than a massacre of normal Londoners, ordinary people like them. That's why I think the investigation is still important, even if it doesn't directly help to catch the mastermind and other members of the network. If it turns out the dominant media story is correct then what have we lost? - that's what everyone thinks anyway.