London Terror Attack: Politics

I just want to express how impressed I am with the attitude of the British in this sad situation. The words of those living in London both seen on the "tele" and written in the other thread here at AI show gracious and self-controlled wisdom in action.

Most impressive,

Fellows

Pipe up if you rode the tube today!

Me? Gloucester to Victoria to Euston.

Never seen Euston so empty.

An intelligent response would be to say that the people who actually carried out the bombings are responsible for their actions and that the UK should carry what it considers appropriate justice on them; and that Iraq, Bush, Blair, et al. can be seen as a justification from the terrorists, and thus these people and situations carry some of the burden as well.

The UK has been through this kind of thing before, the culture is different, and they have a right to handle this the way they want to handle it.

...but no one's going to say that here.

This underlines the need for the WOT including the war in Iraq and the continued holding and interrogation of those in prison. It also must make us think even more seriously about the regimes in Tehran and Damascus. The WOT cannot be successful until all terrorist-harboring regimes have been neutralized one way or another

Does anyone see an analogy to the Native Americans in the US?

Originally posted by e1618978
But I think that you are being too generous to the British "talking heads". I have not heard their accusations myself yet, but I doubt that they are being as general as you state.

I've been watching iTV and the Beeb since yesterday morning at 11:00 when I got off a bus near Hyde Park Corner. I've not heard ANYTHING but updates.

It is probably more like "This is all due to that bastard GWB", not "The west caused this via centuries of colonial oppression" [/B]

You seriously underestimate the British TV news.

Originally posted by Moe_in_Texas
Does anyone see an analogy to the Native Americans in the US?

Not really - we killed 99% of the native americans with guns and disease, took the land they were on, lampooned them in comics and movies, formed an oppressive government agency to interfere in their affairs, forced them onto reservations, and then finally threw them a bone by letting them start casinos.

You can compare the native americans to the various genocides that have occured over the years, but nothing that bad has ever happened in the middle east.

The only thing with an equivalent effect is the flipping of the magnetic poles of the earth, which turned the whole middle east into a desert, and mother nature did it, not us.

Originally posted by midwinter
Well, that's the point, isn't it? Terrorism is a tactic, and, even worse, operates more or less independently of state-funding, which is what the Bush admin and their supported don't seem to get. Certainly there are issues of funding, but the fundamental issue for those of us on the other side of it (and those of us in London right now) is simply this: shooting at terrorists makes more terrorists, not fewer. No, but killing them makes for fewer.

These are not people that can be reasoned with. That is the part that many keep skipidy-skipping bye. They don't want to live in peace with you, they want you dead. They don't want to have tea and crumpets with you at Starbucks, they want you dead. They don't want to stand next to you at a soccer game as your kids play a lively round together, they want to watch their kids kill yours. They don't want to have a friendly game of bridge after work, they want to dangle your charred body from a bridge. They don't want the "infidels" out of Iraq so that they can live in peace with their muslim neighbors, they want to rule the region with terror and brutality.

They have declared war on all civilized nations, we can't just pretend there is no war. War typically means that one side will try to kill more people on the other-side than can be bared, thus a victory. That is obviously their objective. It would seem some would grant a victory without even lifting a finger. What is far worse is they are targeting not military, but civilians that can't defend themselves. And yes, they will take money to support their cause from whomever is willing to give, wether pretenses are true or not.

They refers to fanatic radical muslims and their supporters and not the vast majority of muslims, just to be clear.

Originally posted by NaplesX
War typically means that one side will try to kill more people on the other-side than can be bared, thus a victory. That is obviously their objective.
pfft .. are you joking? They better pick up the pace. More people have probably been killed over the past couple years slipping on wet floors than from terror attacks.

These attacks, like all terror attacks, aren't intended to wipe out the enemy, they are meant to intimidate the target population.

Originally posted by NaplesX
Spain could not bare the civilian deaths, and thus they handed a victory to the Muslim extremists. This is an attempt to achieve the same in England.

Come on.

This is exactly correct. There is a dircet line from this event to the one in Spain. If Britain capitulates their will be 2-3 more just like it.

I think Britain has more spine than Spain.

( hmmm...that kind of rolls of the tongue doesn't it )

Originally posted by NaplesX
Spain could not bare the civilian deaths, and thus they handed a victory to the Muslim extremists. This is an attempt to achieve the same in England.

Come on.

Spain did the right thing, they ditched a government that lied to them, and waged their tail to the US foregin policy.

Originally posted by BRussell
The only people I've heard make blatant statements like this are from people like you two. Why do you guys need someone to argue with - you could just sit in your rooms and have arguments with your imaginary friends.

Well...actually...there was another post (deleted yesterday).

Originally posted by BRussell
What would this capitulation look like? If it involves Iraq, I'd say the capitulation was starting the war in the first place.

Please explain.

e#s:

It is probably more like "This is all due to that bastard GWB", not "The west caused this via centuries of colonial oppression"

On what grounds do you make this claim?

Why do you think the British are, as a populous, so reluctant to involve themselves militarily in the ME? It's because they have a much better understanding of what their nation's history means in broader geopolitical terms as they have a recent history of being occupying colonialists.

Do not assume that the British are just Americans across the ocean.

CC:

Well...actually...there was another post (deleted yesterday).

There are hundreds of posts outlining a very rational and intelligent sequence of historical events pre-dating Bush by hundreds of years covering multiple nations. Yet if one post says "BUSH CAUSED THIS ALL BY HIMSELF!" that is apparently the one worth latching on to and commenting on.

Is this not extremely dishonest on an intellectual level?

Please explain.

Think of it this way:
Vader attempting to piss Luke off so much that he joins the dark side.

Originally posted by groverat
There are hundreds of posts outlining a very rational and intelligent sequence of historical events pre-dating Bush by hundreds of years covering multiple nations. Yet if one post says "BUSH CAUSED THIS ALL BY HIMSELF!" that is apparently the one worth latching on to and commenting on.

Is this not extremely dishonest on an intellectual level?

I wasn't latching onto the ONE post...only pointing out that Naples and Cosmo weren't" The only people I've heard make blatant statements like this" as the previous poster said.

Originally posted by NaplesX
Um, hello!!??

Terrorism did not stem from Iraq. Muslim terrorists have been attacking western interests long before even 9/11.

Let's not forget that.

Still, would there have been a London bombing if there was no irak invasion?

There are no simple answers, no single cause, no one is totally innocent, everyone feels justified for doing what they do or think. If you can accept that, welcome to reality. Otherwise, have fun in la-la land.

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Well...there was a WTC/Pentagon attack and there had been no Iraq invasion.
but there was everything else that motivated that one.

Originally posted by BuonRotto
There are no simple answers

Certainly true. However...

Originally posted by BuonRotto
everyone feels justified for doing what they do or think.

That doesn't mean that everyone is justified for doing what they do.

Terrorists might use the invasion of Iraq as justification for their (recent) bombings...but this doesn't mean they are right. And then...we go back to 9/11. There had been no invasion of Iraq there, so what was the justification then? And was it right?

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Well...there was a WTC/Pentagon attack and there had been no Iraq invasion. Actually the first Iraq War in 1990 was the reason for terrorism in the 1990s up until 9/11. I'm not saying it was a legitimate reason, but it was the stated reason.

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Well...there was a WTC/Pentagon attack and there had been no Iraq invasion.

Both Spain and Britain have (had) governments that very directly has supported the wierd american concept of "war on terror". I would feel a bit more insecure if I lived in Italy or Denmark then I do here in Norway. Yet we also have a few soldiers in Iraq, for some absurd reason.

Originally posted by BRussell
Actually the first Iraq War in 1990 was the reason for terrorism in the 1990s.

And 9/11?

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
What does this mean?
apparently nothing. Terrorist attacks are completely irrational, lack any strategic thought and exist outside of all existing political structures, right? no

As groverat noted, all of this has its roots in centuries of interaction between political units worldwide. Like everything else in the world, you have to understand the immediate and historical contexts to understand the moment.

These attacks are not in response to Iraq, but part of a continuous war on the civilized world. They will not rest until we are dead. Therefore it is our duty to kill them first.

In the long run, the spread of Democracy and economic development in the Middle East will strangle the terrorist-fueling ideology. I think that most Muslims want to be more like us and less like them. Sorry, no links for that statement, just a hunch.

Originally posted by New
Why is it the US have been involved in close to 240 interventions in other countries only this century? Wow, and it's only been 4 years.

Originally posted by giant
Terrorist attacks are completely irrational, lack any strategic thought and exist outside of all existing political structures, right?

Never suggested they were completely irrational or lacked any strategic thought or exist outside of all existing political structures.

However, I am unwilling to allow someone to justify violent, deadly attacks (particularly against unarmed civilians).

There are political approaches and there are war approaches. What the terrorists seem to be saying is that they are unwilling to work within political processes to get what they want, but instead jump right to war and violence.

I won't deny that the people that have perpetrated these attacks (over the past decade or so) feel oppressed or angry or otherwise wronged by the western world (and the U.S. specifically). But that feeling isn't necessarily correct...and it also isn't necessarily a justification for violent tactics.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4663313.stm

"On Thursday Mr Galloway said Londoners had paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan.

He told the Commons it was the US-led coalition's actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo which had inflamed hatred of the West in the Muslim world."

"Earlier Mr Galloway said he was absolutely clear the bombings had been carried out by Islamic extremists inspired by Osama Bin Laden's world outlook.

He argued that the bombings had not come out of the "clear blue sky" - the background was the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, photographs of abuses by US troops at Abu Ghraib prison and the continuing confinement of people by America at Guantanamo."

"Mr Galloway linked the deaths of people in London to the deaths of those in Falluja at the hands of coalition forces.

Originally posted by NaplesX
Let me guess, the US?
The west as a whole, but the US now plays the role europe did until half a century ago.

On Thursday Mr Galloway said Londoners had paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr Galloway may regret his rash statements, as I imagine that this attack will swing Britan more in favor of the US war on terror and/or Iraq. He still relys on re-election votes.

Originally posted by NaplesX
Right so it's Bush's fault.
No, that's just you trying to make sense of something you don't understand, like a native who has never seen an airplane and concludes it's the god of the birds.

Originally posted by NaplesX
implication
I didn't imply anything, that's just your imagination looking for a way to fit something you don't understand or know about into your belief system, a belief system that relies on taking contemporary political stuctures completely out of context.
academia
It's has nothing to do with 'academia.' You don't have to be an academic to know that (and why) uninformed beliefs are consistently wrong.

:lol:

Off Topic

Has anyone heard from Seg? Do we know he is ok?

Originally posted by NaplesX
Right so it's Bush's fault. :D

Man, you just want SO bad for people to say this, and you're the only one saying it. Over and over and over. :lol:

Originally posted by NaplesX
Where are the most corrupt, oppressive and savage parts of the earth located?

Why it's the ME, of course. This was true long before 9/11.

Why is that? Is it simply because of western meddling?

BZZT! I think that Africa takes the title, with pacific asia and the middle east coming in tied for distant second.

He hasn't posted in any of the London threads.

Originally posted by DanMacMan
So instead we leave them alone, pretend they don't exist. Then like a cancer they will grow and become a stronger force until which time we have another 9/11 scale attack. Brilliant.

Wow! I hadn't noticed that those were the ONLY TWO OPTIONS that might come from my statement! If we're not killing terrorists, we MUST therefore be IGNORING them! There's CLEARLY nothing in between!

Originally posted by audiopollution
I always thought he was in Spain. Isn't he?

He seems to move around alot.

Originally posted by groverat
It's pretty simple:
You beef up your intelligence services and work with international bodies to police terror cells.

The terrorists are not an army, so fighting them with an army is insane.

Okay...

- Who is to say that we haven't started to "beef up our intelligence services"?

- What "international bodies"? The U.N.?

- What does "police terror cells" mean exactly?

Originally posted by NaplesX
Spain could not bare the civilian deaths, and thus they handed a victory to the Muslim extremists. This is an attempt to achieve the same in England.

Come on. Listen fool. I have Spanish relatives and friends. For you to say that the Spanish people got scared by the bombings only speaks of your utter st...ignorance.

If going out MASSIVELY on the streets after the bombings and voting out a candidate who carelessly tried to politicize the bombings by blaming the wrong people is handing a victory to the Muslim extremists...

(edited by audiopollution to remove ad-hom. the member you're addressing has been banned.)

DELETE

That is not a matter for public discussion on the boards, PM me or e-mail me and I'll be happy to converse about it. I mentioned it because (1) since it says "banned" under his name it's not a secret and (2) to let those who wish to respond to him know it is pointless.

CC:

- Who is to say that we haven't started to "beef up our intelligence services"?

When did I say we weren't?

- What "international bodies"? The U.N.?

Among others, yes.

- What does "police terror cells" mean exactly?

Keeping close tabs on them at all times and working with host countries to have them arrested (and massive amounts of political/diplomatic pressure when the host countries are uncooperative).

Terrorism is a matter of policing, not of military intervention.

dmz:

This is has nothing to do with this. History is forcing the primitive aspects of Islam to either modernize or be ground up and thrown away.

How, exactly, is "History" doing something active? I would think such a complex premise would deserve more than a couple of lines of simplistic, WhiteHouse-Press-Room rhetoric.

I think this policing is happening. But it is likely only part of the solution. At some point you go in and blow the damn place up. And...sometimes...they slip by and pull off something like what we saw yesterday.

Some observations:

7/7/2005 9:30:00 PM GMT

A group calling itself "The Secret Organization of Al Qaeda in Europe" posted a statement on an internet site, claiming responsibility for the deadly attacks that hit London on Thursday.

But MSNBC TV translator Jacob Keryakes said that the statement in which the group claimed responsibility for the attacks contained an error in one of the Quranic verses it cited. That suggests that the claim is phony, he said.

"This is not something Al Qaeda would do," he said.

...

There are a few things about these attacks that are disturbing, and largely ignored by the mainstream: I shall mention two:

First, Israeli Finance minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a warning of the terrorist attacks via Scotland Yard, before they happened, causing him to alter his itinerary..but apparently nobody else received this warning. Why was nobody else warned, and why is nobody interested in questioning this peculiarity?

Secondly, the media yet again have assigned reponsibility for the attacks, based on an unverified and unreliable claim on an "al qaeda" website, the URL of which remains unknown and unpublished (and therefore most probably non-existent). It is fashionable these days to automatically assign blame to "Islamic" groups, presumably because the Bush Administration, with the unquestioning aid of the mainstream media, has architected and framed the "War in terror" to equate all terrorists in the eyes of the western public as Muslim or Arab.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050707/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_britain_explosions_1

and this one from an Israeli news site:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/597650.html

and this from yet another Israeli news site:

Report: Israel Was Warned Ahead of First Blast
13:30 Jul 07, '05 / 30 Sivan 5765

(IsraelNN.com) Army Radio quoting unconfirmed reliable sources reported a short time ago that Scotland Yard had intelligence warnings of the attacks a short time before they occurred.

The Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address and economic summit.

At present, train and bus service in London have been suspended following the series of attacks. No terrorist organization has claimed responsibility at this time.

Israeli officials stress the advanced Scotland Yard warning does not in any way indicate Israel was the target in the series of apparent terror attacks.

To add (edit): This little snippet from WRH, which is a valid point re. the Netanyahu aspect:

This story is now being spun by claiming that Netanyahu actually got his phone call just after the first blast, but two facts contradict this spin. The first is that for an hour after the first blast, it was thought to be and reported as a power surge related incident involving a blown transformer. Second, the first explosion was close enough to Netanyahu's hotel to reportedly shut down the phone service, so nobody could have called Netanyahu after the first explosion.

Someone's lying to us, yet again. And we're swallowing it, yet again, like good whores do.

...

What do we have here:

An obviously fake "al qaeda" "admission", full of Koranic errors and misspellings etc, from a website, the URL of which has NOT remains unknown and remains unpublished. This is the same "form" as so many other "al qaeda" admissions of responsibility...ie "al qaeda" websites that are unknown, anonymous, and MOST DEFINITELY FAKE OR MYTHICAL

Scotland Yard pre-warned Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the attacks, and he changed his schedule as a result of the warning. Since the bombs were on moving targets, i.e. vehicles, whose location was moving at speeds of up to 40mph, from where did Scotland Yard receive the intelligence about how the part of London where Netanyahu was at at the time could have coincided with the location of one of the bombs, in order for him to alter his schedule? Also, why was this forewarning, published on various mainstream website, subsequently erased from those sites? Since Scotland Yard knew in advance, why did only Benjamin Netanyahu, an senior international political figure get warned, whereas ordinary Londoners were kept in the dark.

How damned convenient this is for Tony Blair and George Bush and the so-called "war on terror". This one's a slam-dunk: exactly what was required to popularly rejuvenate their War on Islam aka "war on terror". Al Qaeda claimed "responsibility". The media jumped onto the "al qaeda" bandwagon, instantly, predictably. What is the verification?"Answer: Zero, non-existent. It doesn't requre any verification, or proof, because in the eyes of an easily-led public, all terrorism worth going to war against is automatically assigned to Muslim groups. Real or imaginary ones. Mostly imaginary by the looks of things so far.

Apart from the obvious immediate horrific effects of indiscriminate bombings on the lives of those affected, the politics and maneuvering behind this incident stink. Was this a conspiracy...damn right it was...more than one person was involved. Whoever it was at Scotland Yard who leaked the warning to Netanyahu is probably getting a severe grilling, or has gotten fired already. Netanyahu probably reported his timely warning back to the Israeli media in all innocence...

Another thought, as regards motivation:

Be extremely skeptical as to who explains these events with such promptness and certainty, the how, and why. This looks just like yet another "false flag event" orchestrated by, possibly, US or UK special ops, either jointly or in liaison. It would be an extremely easy operation for the powers-that-be to pay politically "middle-eastern men" a few $/million to manufacture suitcase bombs and leave them on buses and trains with timing devices. It is also so easy for MI6 etc to manufacture an intelligence trail that points to Islamist groups, or whatever. If you're an expert in such things...such a cover would be childs play.

Lets see what will happen in the future as a result of this, and other attacks in the future: Lets see what happens to Blair's popularity and the sudden rise of faith the public has in his alliance with Bush as regard the 'war on terror", and related matters. Also, there is a move to promote national identity cards in the UK, or even mandatory interactive personal ID chips. Blair and company are extremely in favor of going this direction, and the English people are a potentially good subject. Sounds paranoid or far-fetched? No way; companies like Applied Digital and others have the technology ready to go. Those tens of thousands of security cameras installed all over London in public places failed to prevent the attacks...so something far more intrusive or drastic will be readily acceptable by a suffering populace.

Who gains by an attack like this? Answer: big government, the $mega-billion security industry, the military, ie those promoting the 'war on terror' and those making money from the industries that support it, every time. Who are the losers? Ordinary people. Privacy rights. Civil rights. Out-of-favor religious groups. To justify the new post 9-11 model, terrorist attacks must happen with some regularity, or the public will lose faith. Thus we will see how motivation works.

Well, the MO is textbook Al Qaeda, as is the message afterwards. I would certainly hope and assume that the UK is following up on this assumption of islamo-fascists being behind this. I don't think the book is closed yet on that. I have good faith in Scotland Yard, the MI groups and the UK government to do a thorough and thoughtful job in this investigation. The Brits are a lot more mature with regard to how to handle these sorts of things, and have done investigations like this plenty of times before.

Oh, and "architected" is not a word! :mad: ;) :P

WRT: Iraq and any pullouts. Remember, it's these terrorists who are framing the argument that way, and really, who are they to say what goes?

From this source:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3338638a14339,00.html

"Heroic fighters of the Arab nation, it is time for revenge against the crusader and Zionist British government, in response to the massacre carried out by Great Britain in Iraq and Afghanistan," ANSA quoted the message as saying on a site it named as "el qal3ah.com". "

And from here:
http://www.joyjunction.org/bulletin/modules.php?name=News&file=showarticle&threadid=1114

Then there's http://www.al-qal3ah.com/, http://www.qal3ah.net/ and a number of associated domain names such as http://www.qal3ati.biz/ and others.

These names are of concern, as they are believed to be associated with terrorist Saad Rashed Mohammed Al-Fagih.

And some more:

AL-QAL3AH.COM

64.246.51.50
Record Type:

OrgName: Everyones Internet, Inc.
OrgID: EVRY
Address: 390 Benmar
Address: Suite 200
City: Houston
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 77060
Country: US

NetRange: 64.246.0.0 - 64.246.63.255
CIDR: 64.246.0.0/18
NetName: EVRY-BLK-9
NetHandle: NET-64-246-0-0-1
Parent: NET-64-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Allocation
NameServer: NS1.EV1.NET
NameServer: NS2.EV1.NET
Comment: ADDRESSES WITHIN THIS BLOCK ARE NON-PORTABLE
RegDate: 2001-10-05
Updated: 2003-03-31

TechHandle: RW172-ARIN
TechName: Williams, Randy
TechPhone: +1-713-579-2850
TechEmail: admin@ev1.net

OrgAbuseHandle: ABUSE477-ARIN
OrgAbuseName: ABUSE
OrgAbusePhone: +1-713-579-2850
OrgAbuseEmail: abuse@ev1.net

OrgNOCHandle: NOC1445-ARIN
OrgNOCName: NOC
OrgNOCPhone: +1-713-579-2850
OrgNOCEmail: noc@ev1.net

OrgTechHandle: RW172-ARIN
OrgTechName: Williams, Randy
OrgTechPhone: +1-713-579-2850
OrgTechEmail: admin@ev1.net

OrgTechHandle: VST3-ARIN
OrgTechName: Stinson, Valarie
OrgTechPhone: +1-713-579-2850
OrgTechEmail: admin2@ev1.net

That actually doesn't mean anything. RIPE deals with internet infrastructure. You are doing the whois through them. good research, though. thanks. if you want to cut down the length of your posts you could post links to whois.sc (easy format: http://www.whois.sc/QAL3AH.NET)

Interesting, the Freepers are watching these sites. Here is a homepage for JonathanRGalt:

http://www.freerepublic.com/~johnathanrgalt/
http://www.geocities.com/johnathanrgalt/

from your last IP address, QAL3AH.NET - 212.67.202.241
Record Type: _ IP Address
% The objects are in RPSL format.
%
% Note: the default output of the RIPE Whois server
% is changed. Your tools may need to be adjusted. See
% http://www.ripe.net/db/news/abuse-proposal-20050331.html
% for more details.
%
% Rights restricted by copyright.
% See http://www.ripe.net/db/copyright.html

% Information related to '212.67.202.0 - 212.67.202.255'

inetnum: 212.67.202.0 - 212.67.202.255
netname: UK-PIPEX-HOSTED-SERVERS
descr: UK-PIPEX-HOSTED-SERVERS-23
descr: PIPEX Hosting Nottingham
descr: Nottingham
country: GB
admin-c: HM655-RIPE
tech-c: HM655-RIPE
rev-srv: ns.webfusion.co.uk
rev-srv: ns2.webfusion.co.uk
status: ASSIGNED PA
notify: *****@pipex.net
mnt-by: AS5519-MNT
changed: *****@pipex.net 20050308
source: RIPE

role: Hostmaster Contact
address: PIPEX Communications
address: (formerly GX Networks Ltd)
address: Carlton House
address: 27A Carlton Drive
address: London
address: SW15 2BS
phone: +44 20 8957 1210
fax-no: +44 20 8957 5700
e-mail: *****@pipex.net
admin-c: MATT1-RIPE
admin-c: KIRK1-RIPE
admin-c: HM655-RIPE
admin-c: ID40-RIPE
admin-c: RIZ5-RIPE
admin-c: RW688-RIPE
admin-c: FAZ5-RIPE
tech-c: MATT1-RIPE
tech-c: GEF8-RIPE
tech-c: SH1765-RIPE
tech-c: RW688-RIPE
tech-c: RIZ5-RIPE
tech-c: ID40-RIPE
tech-c: MLAU1-RIPE
tech-c: BRI69-RIPE
tech-c: JR2424-RIPE
tech-c: HM655-RIPE
tech-c: FAZ5-RIPE
nic-hdl: HM655-RIPE

http://www.wtvq.com/servlet/Satellite?c=MGArticle&cid=1031783713979&pagename=WTVQ/MGArticle/TVQ_BasicArticle

Here is yet more conformation that both Scotland Yard and the Israeli Embassy in London (and presumably certain elements of the UK intelligence agencies) knew about the attacks beforehand. I hope this isn't construed as "anti-semitic", just because it happened to be an Israeli official who was warned prior to the bombings, and changed his schedule as a direct result.
Israel of course, having been continuously at war with Arabs and Muslims since its inception are the prime beneficiary of any ratcheting uop of the war on terror.

As a result of these attacks, lets see if the Brits get suckered into what both Blair and co. want so badly...namely the introduction of a big-brotheresque/nuovo-fascism...with an accelerated erosion of civil rights and liberties, national I.D. cards (and eventually, personal-chip implants), far greater government spending on military, security and 'anti-terror' measures, and eventually a cashless society, etc etc. It would be supremely depressing if what looks suspiciously like another 'false-flag operation' was to eliminatd all the civil gains that have taken almost a century of blood and guts to achieve, including defeating the Nazis in WW2. Ordinary people in the UK were subject to 25 years of terrorism from the Provisional IRA and its offshoots, and the Brits didnt allow that to take away their open society. Ironically, the IRA's terrorist activities was traditionally funded by sources in the United States, for example Noraid, which even more ironically has their head office in Manhattan.

Actually, in this case, the notion that "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" can be allowed in the so-called "war on terror" because the perps in that case are of a Christian denomination, ie not Islamic. By the way, I do realize that the IRA was NOT the only source of terrorism in that struggle... "Protestant" organizations supported by the British Government, and the British military in Northern Ireland carried out equally heinous attacks on Irish Catholics as well... but that is another story..and is kinda slightly off topic.

I think seg is in Barcelona right now, if I'm not mistaken - or he could be in Wales (his profile says Cymru, which means Wales).

I hope he's alright.

Fox is pathetic. Those comments are an embarrassment to America. I would be very offended if I were a Muslim and a British citizen. Why are they working so hard to desensitize the American people? Why do "we" (don't count me in that group though!) allow them?

I remember one comment one of those Fox idiots made when the battle for the occupation/liberation of Iraq started: "the Shi'ite has hit the fan". I mean, WTF?

Originally posted by sammi jo
To add (edit): This little snippet from WRH, which is a valid point re. the Netanyahu aspect:

This story is now being spun by claiming that Netanyahu actually got his phone call just after the first blast, but two facts contradict this spin. The first is that for an hour after the first blast, it was thought to be and reported as a power surge related incident involving a blown transformer. Second, the first explosion was close enough to Netanyahu's hotel to reportedly shut down the phone service, so nobody could have called Netanyahu after the first explosion.
Or the explosion was reported as a 'power surge' because it had been decided, rightly or wrongly, that in the event of a terrorist attack on the Underground it would be better for the safety of London's citizens if people weren't panicked.

These bombs were planted by terrorists. Yes they were. Just like in Madrid, where the bombers killed themselves after a fight with the police when they were tracked down.

Stop wasting your time with this nonsense. Start thinking instead about these people and their grievances and the possibility (oh my lord) that recent British foreign policy might have stirred a bunch of psychotic religious freaks into action.

What a waste of time this conspiracy nonsense is. The house is on fire and you're watching the fucking X Files.

How many more Governments does the CIA have to reengineer/f-ck-with before the world has enough? Just look at the state of South America and that should have been reason enough not to allow these assholes into Iraq. I partially blame the US and UK government for these bombings, their interfering with sovereign nations and expecting gratitude is naive and dangerous. My heart goes out for the souls that were lost in London the other day; its a horrible, horrible tragedy. But where are the flowers on the embassy for the 100,000+ civilian lives that have been lost in Iraq. People are so apathetic towards the other side, "hey as long as it is happening in someone elses backyard". These terrorist are doing the only thing normal people without a zillion dollar military budget can do to fight back. These people dont hate freedom or democracy, they're being f_cked with, that's what they can't deal with, kind of reminds me of everyone I know.

Originally posted by Relic
How many more Governments does the CIA have to reengineer/f-ck-with before the world has enough? Just look at the state of South America and that should have been reason enough not to allow these assholes into Iraq. I partially blame the US and UK government for these bombings, their interfering with sovereign nations and expecting gratitude is naive and dangerous. My heart goes out for the souls that were lost in London the other day; its a horrible, horrible tragedy. But where are the flowers on the embassy for the 100,000+ civilian lives that have been lost in Iraq. People are so apathetic towards the other side, "hey as long as it is happening in someone elses backyard". These terrorist are doing the only thing normal people without a zillion dollar military budget can do to fight back. These people dont hate freedom or democracy, they're being f_cked with, that's what they can't deal with, kind of reminds me of everyone I know.
Stop it with the fucking copouts already. This 'conditional' sorrow is complete bullshit. "I feel sorry for your loss, but..."

Yes, the bombers probably felt they or someone they related to, were being fucked with or getting the raw end of the deal. No, blowing up a bus is absolutely not the "the only thing normal people without a zillion dollar military budget can do to fight back" It's not even near to being the only option, nor is it close to being 'normal'.

Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Or the explosion was reported as a 'power surge' because it had been decided, rightly or wrongly, that in the event of a terrorist attack on the Underground it would be better for the safety of London's citizens if people weren't panicked.

These bombs were planted by terrorists. Yes they were. Just like in Madrid, where the bombers killed themselves after a fight with the police when they were tracked down.

Stop wasting your time with this nonsense. Start thinking instead about these people and their grievances and the possibility (oh my lord) that recent British foreign policy might have stirred a bunch of psychotic religious freaks into action.

What a waste of time this conspiracy nonsense is. The house is on fire and you're watching the fucking X Files.

Amen and, amen.

Originally posted by groverat
It really makes no sense for you (aside from a desire to legitimize your religious beliefs) to make statements like "that can't be fully explained by purely random processes".
First of all, it shows a rather silly and telling obsession with the evolution debate, as conscious human progress is in no way "random" and the only reason to mention it is to try and relate this "Islam is savage and backward" argument to the evolution "debate".
Secondly, you provide no logic as to why it cannot be explained by anything other than God. This is yet another link to the evolution debate, where incredulity is supposed to carry the day for the Christian side.
hmmmmm...not quite sure why you seized so strongly on the evolution debate, like I noted earlier, we aren't going to agree on this, causally.
Originally posted by groverat
As I said already, a society's collective advancement is not random, it is very easily explained. Any movement, forward or backward, is quite obviously the result of education; historical, social and scientific. Through a very long process of trial and error we adopt new ideas, accept new social norms and assimilate new scientific discoveries. We do it on an individual level and we do it on a cultural/social level and it is not the least bit complicated or mysterious.
groverat, if this was a matter of education, Las Vegas wouldn't exist. Man is not a political creature, man is a religious creature. People do not learn from experience, they learn from belief.
Originally posted by groverat
In the last 100 years we have seen the nuclear/fire bombing destruction of cities full of civilians, like Sodom & Gomorrah without God.
not perfect, but getting better
Originally posted by groverat
Tell me, dmz, we are on quite a terror kick ourselves with illegal war and dropping bombs on cities from thousands of feet above. What ideology is dominating this (apparently legitimate in your eyes) terror march? I'll borrow your term and say "hard-core" Christianity.
illegal war? I don't think any country would act differently, regardless of ideology. The attacks of 9/11, designed to decapitate our government, and the threat of dirty bombs, bio terror, etc are very real. You should logically expect a response, no matter how scattered or incoherent.
Originally posted by groverat
I'm sorry, dmz, but support for our "War on Terror" is not "growing every day", it's moving the other direction. Worldwide there is condemnation for our acts of terror.
I didn't mention the 'war on terror', I made mention of the growing collective consciousness of the barbaric nature of terror in general.
Originally posted by groverat
Where is he and how do you know what he's doing or feeling?
?

I've been looking at a few things in the lateish 19th century -- treatment of the Russian serfs, Grant's wilderness campaign, etc. These are things that we won't see again. Today, Grant would have been tried as a war criminal, and not "because of education" but because of a moral sense that certain behavior under any curcumstances is wrong. This belief has no empirical data -- it came from a moral sense that is continuing to grow, albeit with significant wow and flutter along the way.

But Sammi. You seem more interested in obscure theories than reasonable answers. A good investigator starts out with the most logical explainations, not obsure conspiracies with a political agenda.

The answers are there. Radical muslims exists. They have no problem recruiting young, alienated muslim followers.

Originally posted by New
But Sammi. You seem more interested in obscure theories than reasonable answers. A good investigator starts out with the most logical explainations, not obsure conspiracies with a political agenda.

Yes, they do. And this "Secret Organization of Al Qaeda in Europe" admission looks as fake as a $7 bill. And, as you said, this is definitely a most obscure theory, but which has attacted the undivided attention of every mainstream outlet from here to the Yangtze Kiang, with all the necessary repetitions to ensure that the history has already been absorbed into the public consciousness.

http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/56252

extracted: To begin with, Al-Qaida statements come first to Arabic press not from BBC and Reuters. This statement first appear in mainstream press and was subsequently picked up by Arab press, which breaks rank with ever other statement Al-Qaida has ever issued officially. This fact alone should make the validity of this statement suspect. Secondly, the Arabic grammar used in the so-called claim of r