More Cambridge bombers

As I was walking to work this morning I passed the Mosque, as I always do, and was surprised to see a load of TV cameras outside. Later I saw the headlines in the local press. At least two of the bombers that have been arrested recently worked at Addenbrokes and attended Mosque round the corner from me.

In addition to that Dr Kafeel Ahmed, the bomber who was wrestled to the ground in Glasgow and is probably the most recognisable, if charred, face of the recent plot, studied at Anglia Ruskin University. He's supposed to have had links to Hizb ut-Tahir whilst in the city, who appear to be (or have been) very organised in the area.

It's believed that Cambridge is where the bombers met, as friends, and began a relationship that ended in attempted mass murder of air travellers and "slags". One former friend described Bilal from their meetings in Cambridge like this;

"Bilal had grown up in Baghdad. He told me how he hated Saddam Hussein, how even after the American invasion his extended family stayed there. All were of the same ideological persuasion. All believed in Wahhabi ideology. He didn't see himself as being radical: he saw himself as following Islam. He developed a vitriolic hatred for the Shias after one of his closest friends at university in Iraq was killed by a Shia militiaman. He would say they needed to be massacred. He called them kafirs, disbelievers who insulted the Prophet...

"He refused to frequent the local halal takeaway in Cambridge because the Turkish guys there didn't attend mosque. He used to say to me: "We should have soft hearts for the believers and hard hearts for the non-believers." He epitomised this. He was very humble and polite and had an endearing and distinctive belly laugh."

It's a chilling but all too believable portrait of someone who has allowed their passion and commitment to what they see as a better world to lead them into dark and horrifying acts. These men may have been determined opponents of the war on Iraq and Afghanistan but it's clear they share little common ground with progressive politics.

I was surprised to read what appears to be a new approach in the latest Socialist Worker that "Attacks on civilians in Britain are unjustifiable – just as are the killing of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere" by editor Chris Bambery (who is a great admirer of the pro-terrorist film Battle of Algiers). I hope this means a more nuanced approach from Socialist Worker and Respect towards the Iraqi resistance in future.

These attacks were not only an unjustifiable reaction to the Iraq war, a small secret cell carrying out unaccountable and poorly planned actions that could benefit no one (especially foreign workers in the NHS), their heads were also bound up in the baggage of a reactionary and backward form of Islam that didn't simply oppose "Imperialism" but went against many of the progressive advances, like a women's role in society, that have been made in the last thirty years.

My enemy's enemy is not always my friend - and whilst we should keep up the dialogue with those with whom we disagree, if we beginning to duck important issues - like what kind of society we would like to see and what kinds of political actions are effective then, I think, we'll be doing ourselves a great disservice.