191 Comments

1. Robert Crawford:

Israeli sources have been denying having received any warning.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:05 am 2. David Thomson:

Great Britain may be paying the price for providing easily attained welfare benefits to the immigrating Muslims. I suspect that far too many young men just sit around all day, feeling sorry for themselves, and blaming the Christians and Jews for their troubles.

Political correctness is a problem in the United States—but the situation is almost out of control in the British Isles. Assimilating into the wider culture often isnít even encouraged for the new Islamic arrivals. Can the same sort of terrorism occur today in our own country? I doubt it very much.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:41 am 3. ShrinkWrapped:

David,

I agree Europe is in much more trouble than we are but we shouldn’t get too comfortable; after 9/11 there were many reports of Muslims celebrating in places like Jersey City (which has a large Muslim population).

Sadly, it doesn’t take all that many haters to perpetrate such atrocities.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:58 am 4. ambisinistral:

What!? Of course terrorism like this is possible in the US.

Condolences to the English.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:59 am 5. punditeer:

Every expert I’ve ever heard says it’s just a matter of time before this kind of terrorism (mass transit bombings, suicide bombers) arrives here as well. Certainly there are willing “sleepers” here who will do whatever they are told. It no longer makes sense to allow anyone to walk into your country, especially if they are from a different culture. Supposedly the Netherlands is making an effort to force new immigrants to learn Dutch culture before they are allowed in. Actions have been taken against mosques where extremist sermons are delivered. Muslim immigrants (in particular, since they are the problem) need to be fluent in the language and culture of the country that want to live in. Understanding our culture should be a prerequisite for immigration.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:06 am 6. Jamie Irons:

Roger,

Please don’t misunderstand, as I do not in any way wish to diminish or trivialize the horrible suffering of the London victims of terror, but I feel that the terrorists have again made a huge strategic and tactical mistake.

Yesterday’s news was of Bush’s fall from a bicycle, and the G8 and aged rockers’ misguided efforts to “help” Africa by pouring yet more money into it.

This atrocity will refocus our attention where it needs to be.

Toward finishing and winning the war against Islamic fanaticism.

Jamie Irons

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:31 am 7. Terrye:

This is just awful.

I heard that as many as 45 are dead so far and they expect the numbers to go up.

Some AlQaida cell is claiming credit for this piece of barbarism. They want the Brits out of Afghanistan and Iraq and they want them to cut off all support for Israel. They are saying the same thing will happen to the Italians and the Danes if they don’t comply with the demands of the terrorists.

I wonder if it would have made a difference if Spain had stood their ground. I guess we will never know.

I heard Bush speak and he made a pretty good point. The western leaders are in Scotland talking about debt relief and Aids and the environment and the terrorists are killing innocent people. Quite a contrast.

Anybody think the left will see that? I don’t know but the Mayor of London, Livingstone, came down hard on the people who did this and he is a flaming socialist.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:35 am 8. TedM:

Jamie:

I just heard from a relative in London. His fear is that later today, when things calm down a bit, the chorus of ” It is all the fault of the US ” will be heard. “the war is a failure and brought this to London, etc etc.”

I already heard this meme on CSPAN call in show.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:41 am 9. Jamie Irons:

ambi

What!? Of course terrorism like this is possible in the US.

You are exactly right.

People have to wake up and realize that our enemy would like nothing more than to detonate a fission weapon in one or more American cities. With Iran getting the bomb, this terrifying prospect is still more probable.

Glenn Reynolds thinks the possiblity is “nontrivial, but not huge.”

I think this is overly optimistic.

Jamie Irons

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:41 am 10. Terrye:

TedM:

Well they can always kiss up to the terrorists.

But I don’t remember the Brits doing a lot of pandering to the Irish over the years.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:45 am 11. TedM:

Link from the Corner on National Review.

CPB TAX DOLLARS AT WORK [Tim Graham]

On Pacifica Radio’s “Democracy Now,” leftist wacko/ former Labour MP Tony Benn was outrageously predictable this morning in turning the whole discussion into how these attacks will focus on the need for everyone to withdraw from the war in Iraq, and that suicide bombers and stealth bombers accomplish the same thing: kill innocent civilians for political purposes.

Pacifica stations are all funded in part from “community service grants” by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, adding up to about $1 million in federal dollars every year. That does not include the public radio and TV stations that run “Democracy Now” who are not Pacifica-owned.

Posted at 09:38 AM

If you really want to be sick, tune in CSPAN and listen to every other caller.

All predictable.

I am surprised that there haven’t been some smaller bombs set off in various western cities.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:49 am 12. Richard Nieporent:

I don’t know but the Mayor of London, Livingstone, came down hard on the people who did this and he is a flaming socialist.

Terrye, I am only surprised that he didn’t blame the Jews for it. Give him a little time and he will.

This vicious attack is clearly fallout from the Spanish government’s capitulation to terrorism. The only proper response to a terrorist attack is to kill the terrorists not to acquiesce to their demands. With respect to another terrorist attack here, I have been holding my breath since 9/11 waiting for the other shoe to fall. Clearly there is no way of totally stopping inhuman fanatics who are willing to blow themselves up.

My heart goes out to the British people.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:53 am 13. Terrye:

They are even blaming the US for not getting Bin Laden sooner. Of course if Clinton had actually gone after Osama and killed him a decade ago they would all be wearing Tshirts with OBl’s picture on them today. Just like Che.

I am not going to listen to the idiots on Cspan or anywhere else right now. This whole thing is a tragedy and if these losers want to turn this into a hate fest against the US then they can do that. After all the west is a free society and they have the right to be a**holes.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:56 am 14. richard mcenroe:

I have decided that I am in favor of global warming. One city at a time, starting with Tehran, Riyadh and Damascus…

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:12 am 15. Rick Ballard:

Did the “softer” approach gain Israeli’s relief from terrorist attacks during the ’90’s? Or did the attacks slow down when Saddam became unable to fund the bomber’s families and the Israeli’s began awarding the Palestinian scum leaders their very own missiles?

The Copperheads will counsel retreat because run and hide is their preferred tactic. We will also be hearing the dragons teeth meme where every terrorist killed generates a hundred ready to take his place. It doesn’t seem to have occurred in Israel so I tend to draw more lessons from their tactics than those sugeested by the white feather lefties. I’m not particularly interested in being the last one killed.

Piracy was not eradicated by hanging pirates but it was diminished by more than 90%. Terrorists are 21st century pirates who must be dealt with using 19th century tactics. Target and kill the leaders and hang the followers as soon as they are apprehended – affording them the minimal drum head court that was afforded those taken in piracy. It’s worth a serious try.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:18 am 16. Katherine:

Yes, Richard.

Every time something like this happens, I get similar surge of emotion, mixed, with ìround the @#$%ers up and deport them allî. We are nice and civilized and are trying to conduct this war in a most humane way. But I wonder, what will it take for us civilized people to collectively snap. The result would not be pretty.

Best wishes to the Brits. You know we stand with you.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:28 am 17. OJ:

I am also concerned about the UK response to the attacks. As was seen in Spain, people needed something tangible to focus their blame anger and frustration on. The outcome over the next few days could very well be one of growing anger towards the Blair government and its effort in the Middle East.

Hopefully, the course will be different and these tragic events will serve to unite the British people and galvanize the global effort against terror.

Even if we implemented a dictatarian police state these types of attacks are not 100% preventable. I fear them to be 99% likely to occur in the US in the next 5 years.

Most interesting will be the response on the Arab street to these attacks. Not in the hardline autocratic regimes but in the countries that have seen budding democracy recently as a result of Western policy. My guess is that they will be overwhelmingly condemned.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:30 am 18. PJ:

Yesterday I saw War of the Worlds. I found it comforting that the iconography of 9/11 had already found its way into the movies. That meant time was passing and healing wounds. Reality was a long time ago.

Now, today, London reminds me that it’s not over yet, not by a longshot. You are so right, Jamie, we are in a war, and this atrocity renews my passion and commitment to win. Time for Bush and Blair to get tough.

London, we are with you!

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:39 am 19. Jamie Irons:

TedM

I just heard from a relative in London. His fear is that later today, when things calm down a bit, the chorus of ” It is all the fault of the US ” will be heard. “the war is a failure and brought this to London, etc etc.”

Well, your relative didn’t have to wait long (from Normblog):

Contemptible

Somebody obviously had to be first with this:

The British government cannot avoid its responsibility for these terrible attacks, which are a consequence of its support for war and occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[From] The contemptible Socialist Worker.

Jamie Irons

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:41 am 20. Lola:

I saw a link on one of the blogs that I’ve been checking where the London Muslim Association (or something like that) were warning Muslims to stay inside.

I only pray that cooler heads prevail and that a laser-like focus will be aimed on those who commit acts of terror like this and not let them weasel their way out of this, shifting blame onto the victims.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:48 am 21. Lola:

Seems it didn’t take long for Galloway to give yet another example of his idiotic thinking . . .

http://democracyguy.typepad.com/democracy_guy_grassroots_/2005/07/idiocy_thy_name.html

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:50 am 22. Fausta:

It takes a certain type of perverse degenerate to become a terrorist.

Yes, in a sense we’re all Britons now, in that we all grieve together for the victims.

However, back in 2001 I found Colombani’s (editor of Le Monde) We Are All Americans insulting and offensive, in that the article’s tone was one of “we’re all Americans, and we’re to blame” and I quote,

But the reality is perhaps also that of an America whose own cynicism has caught up with. If Bin Laden, as the American authorities seem to think, really is the one who ordered the Sept. 11 attacks, how can we fail to recall that he was in fact trained by the CIA and that he was an element of a policy, directed against the Soviets, that the Americans considered to be wise? Might it not then have been America itself that created this demon?

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:55 am 23. ShrinkWrapped:

In order to take the blame on ourselves, it is necessary to ignore what the terrorists say in their own words. This is a result of deconstruction and political correctness: Reality is never what your enemies say it is; they are always the victims and words can and must be twisted to mean what the left needs them to mean.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:03 am 24. markus:

The problem is the desire for politicians to “do something…anything” every time a tragedy like this occurs. On the left, the call is to shift course on Middle East policy. On the right, the call is to invade another country. Often, what needs to be done is mourn the dead, and stay the course.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:06 am 25. Cynic:

“Apparently Israeli intelligence picked up some kind of warning about attack and notified British moments before.”

FWIW Israel’s Minister of Foreign Affairs said on their TV that the Embassy was advised, after the first bomb, not to go out into the business district of London.

Seems many want to try and tie Israelis into this.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:15 am 26. c:

Galloway and some others would capitulate to the Caliphate for votes, money and attention, but the best Brits are stoic and stalwart. This terror event won’t cow them. The only evil worse than atrocities like today’s are when victims enjoin the cause, justify the slaughter and intimidation, and futilely try to appease the core nihilism of their terror-masters.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:16 am 27. Peter G.:

Markus, I think you got it right.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:16 am 28. ambisinistral:

The following, written by Oriana Fillaci after 911, seems appropriate today.

I’m not talking, obviously, to the hyenas that enjoy seeing the images of the slaughter and sneering “Good! The Americans [British] deserved it.” I’m talking to people who without being bad or stupid still take refuge in reserve and doubt. To them I say: Wake up, people, wake up! Intimidated as you are by the fear of going against the tide, that is, of seeming racist (a wholly inappropriate word, because we’re talking not about a race but a religion), you don’t understand, or don’t want to understand, that what’s under way here is a reverse crusade. Accustomed as you are to playing a double game, blinded as you are by myopia, you don’t understand or don’t want to understand that what’s under way here is a religious war. Wanted and declared by only a fringe group of that religion perhaps, but nonetheless a religious war. A war that they call Jihad. Holy War. A war that doesn’t envision the conquest of our territories, perhaps, but certainly envisions the conquest of our souls. The disappearance of our liberty and our civilization. The annihilation of our way of living and dying, our way of praying and of learning. You don’t understand or don’t want to understand that if we don’t oppose this, don’t defend ourselves against this, don’t fight, Jihad will win. And it will destroy the world that, good or bad, we’ve succeeded in building, changing, improving, and making a little more intelligent, i.e., less bigoted or even without bigotry. And with that it will destroy our culture, our art, our science, our morality, our values, and our pleasures… Christ! Usama Bin Laden feels authorized to kill you and your children because you drink wine or beer, because you don’t wear a long beard or a chador, because you go to the theater and to movies, because you listen to music and sing songs, because you dance in discos or at home, because you watch TV, because you wear miniskirts or shorts, because at the beach you go naked or almost naked, because you make love when you like and where you like and with whom you like. Doesn’t this even interest you, you fools? I’m an atheist, thank God. And I have no intention of allowing myself to be killed because I am.

Oriana Fillaci

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:24 am 29. Buddy Larsen:

Markus, please re-examine use of word “tragedy”–tragedy is unavoidable or accidental. It is a tragedy that the world has problems. But the bombings are not a tragedy, they’re an atrocity. Otherwise, good to hear “stay the course” from you. Hang in there.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:25 am 30. Katherine:

Buddy,

It all depends what the definition of ìstay the courseî is.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:39 am 31. David Thomson:

ì I agree Europe is in much more trouble than we are but we shouldn’t get too comfortable; after 9/11 there were many reports of Muslims celebrating in places like Jersey City (which has a large Muslim population).î

ìGalloway and some others would capitulate to the Caliphate for votes, money and attentionî

I have not overly confident. Itís just that I think the odds are in our favor. Enough of us woke up to reality after 9/11 to make the difference. The United States has a number of silly politicians, but there is nobody comparable to George Galloway.

I am convinced that terrorists feel far more uncomfortable operating in our country. Political correctness makes oneís society more vulnerable to attack. And never underestimate the damage resulting from young men receiving welfare benefits. Thereís a high number of radical Islamics living of the dole in Great Britain. Cynically, one might want to describe it as a form of state sponsored terrorism!

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:44 am 32. TedM:

As usual, we are faced with the dilemma of how to strike out at the perpetrators.

When fighting an element of a religion which has no Vatican city or Berlin or Tokyo, how do we retaliate? This has been the key element of the long term war which has been waged against all of us for decades now.

To make matters worse, our leaders, for easily understood reasons, are unable to name the enemy.

And without the clarity of knowing who the enemy is, our effort to “win the hearts and minds” of our own people is in jeopardy.

I hope the time is near, where we see public officials say the words “Islamist fanatics”. We have no trouble doing that here.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:48 am 33. timmah!:

My condolences to the British. What an outrage!

I don’t think the British are paying the price for anything except not being run by Osama’s woman-hating, Jew-hating, Christian-hating, Hindu-hating, atheist-hating, liberty-hating, you-name-it they-hate-it thugs. These people would have attacked, will attack, anyone anywhere anytime regardless of what they say or do, if it suits their strategy. They’re not attacking France and Germany at the moment because it perpetuates the myth that that we’re bringing this on ourselves by defending civilization.

Buddy, thanks. It’s important to preserve these words.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:59 am 34. Kevin P:

Roger:

Britain isn’t Spain. They will not back down and they will not kneel down to these thugs like the Spainish people did. Even Red Ken got it right.For today. It may be cold comfort right now but our hearts and prayers are with our cousins in Britain and we must redouble our efforts. Maybe Pelosi will realize now that the war is not over and maybe releasing the 500 taliban and Al Queda terrorists from Gitmo is not a bright idea. To all the UK posters on this site our sympathies and prayers go out to you especially. Buck up PeterUK and we have got your back.

Kevin Peters

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:00 am 35. Paul:

Attacks like these will cause the appeasers to agitate more vociferously for appeasement and the warriors on terror to prosecute the WOT more vigorously, thus furthering the already immense ideological rift in Western society. The Jihadis and their leftist fellow travelers know this and no doubt it is part of their strategy to divide and conquer.

However sooner or later they will perpetrate an atrocity so overwhelmingly horrific that the Jacksonian element in this country will erupt in its full fury. It will unite the large majority of us, and the incorrigible Michael Moore left will be relegated to the dustbin of history. One way or another.

I’ve read that one in ten muslims support the goals of radical Islam, or roughly 100 million. This war is just getting started.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:05 am 36. ricpic:

Well, for what it’s worth, John Derbyshire is much less sanguine about the British reaction to this attack than are many on this board.

His sense of it is that the Brits STILL don’t feel mortally threatened by radical Islam and that until they do there is at least a 50/50 chance that they will appease, as they did another threat in 1938.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:08 am 37. Matt in Tampa:

To PeterUK and the other folks from Britain who occasionally read this blog, we are with you. The British have been our most faithful friends for nearly a century and the US stands with its friends.

I have friends and clients in London who I haven’t heard from. I’m worried for them and I’m angry. Attacks in Britain, to me, resonate just as strongly as an attack in New York or LA.

“But I wonder, what will it take for us civilized people to collectively snap. The result would not be pretty.”

Rings so true yet I suspect, there will never be a united front against terror. All morning long, liberals are moaning about the US/Britain’s imperialistic policies and if we were not in Iraq, we wouldn’t have been attacked. The lessons of 9-11 were not learned by 30-40% of the citizens of this country. How long until we face reality ? These attacks are not our fault, they’re not the fault of the british, they’re not the fault of our governments, they’re not the faults of our Iraq policies- they are the fault of the murdering bastards who use religion as an excuse to murder innocent people.

Sorry for the rant. I’d like to see republicans shrug off the ridiculous ranting of the left and simply re-state, over and over again, we stand by our friends when they are attacked, period.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:10 am 38. HenryB:

The U.S. does indeed have politicians that are pretty much clones of Galloway (Cynthia McKinney & Barbara Lee come to mind), but they are ignored by most Americans. Hopefully the Brits will ignore the ravings of Galloway; I suppose we’ll know in a couple of days how the they’ll react. My guess is that Bush & Blair will issue a joint statement to the effect that the US-UK alliance will be strengthened by the events. Then, of course, we’ll see what they’ll actually be able to do to the terrorists.

Of course, we’re all waiting breathlessly to see Mr. Chirac’s response to this attack. Perhaps he doesn’t really care, as presumably those killed and wounded are mere, sub-human “Anglo-Saxons” (though much of London ultimately originates elsewhere, I think). Still, he is aware of the tremendous number of Muslims in France, and he knows he has a problem. The French police are reputedly quite good are interrogating “detainees”, though.

It’s probably time for the UK to clean up some mosques…

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:12 am 39. David Thomson:

ìWell, for what it’s worth, John Derbyshire is much less sanguine about the British reaction to this attack than are many on this board.î

John Derbyshire and I are in complete agreement. The British are whacked out on political correctness. A high percentage of them refuse to face reality. Instead, they will foolishly blame Tony Blair for cooperating with the United States on the war on terror. If only, the Prime Minister had not so angered the victimized Islamic militants. Donít you realize that this is only the expected–and well deserved blow back resulting from the Westís oppression of the citizens of the Middle East?

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:16 am 40. Terrye:

Galloway has already gone belly up, as we knew he would.

But I think there will be all kinds of reactions from people, no single response will suffice.

It is becoming more and more evident that these folks have no respect for human life. They don’t care if you are an Egyptian diplomat or a British commuter, they will kill you.

Islam needs to wake up to this or sooner or later they will all suffer for this kind of attack. Galloway and his ilk can blame this on Blair and Bush if thyey want..but the truth is the people who are responsible for this are the same kind of people killing Iraqis today.

They only want the Brits and Americans out of Iraq so that they can get back to what they do best which is killing and terrorizing their own people.

From the Phillipines to Tel Aviv to Istanbul to Baghdad to Casablanca and Bali..Kashmir and Pennsylvannia…Jakarta and Kabul….Pakistan and Algeria…Saudi Arabia and Madrid…this is what they do. If you are in Iraq or not does not matter. There was no occupation in Iraq when they attacked the USS Cole or our embassies.

People like Galloway treat the Islamists like badly raised and rather slow children whose actions are always a reaction to others. I know they are my enemy and I refuse to underestimate them, unlike the racists of the Left who think it is still 1969.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:33 am 41. Robert Crawford:

The U.S. does indeed have politicians that are pretty much clones of Galloway (Cynthia McKinney & Barbara Lee come to mind), but they are ignored by most Americans.

I beg to differ. They are embraced, supported, and funded by a political party that represents anywhere from a third to a half of the country.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:34 am 42. Lola:

It’s one thing to bring over an Israeli bus torn apart by a homicide bomber and put it on display in various European countries; it’s another thing to see the ubiquitious red decker bus so commonly seen in London ripped apart by a bomb (we don’t know yet how the bomb got on the bus), the very bus which the average Londoner probably has ridden at least once.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:38 am 43. Katherine:

ìHowever sooner or later they will perpetrate an atrocity so overwhelmingly horrific that the Jacksonian element in this country will erupt in its full fury.î

You know, I am not exactly keen on this horrific atrocity that is supposed to finally wake us up. Neither I believe that even coordinated nuclear attacks on American soil would stiffen the spine of the professional yellow-bellied appeasers. Look, if 3000 people murdered in the broad daylight, if Bali massacre, Madrid bombings, ordeal of schoolchildren in Beslan, mass graves of little kids buried with their toys and child prisons in Iraq are not enough to convince some people that we are facing unspeakable evil, nothing will.

Osama and the Islamists do not hide their intentions. They announced their war goals years ago and repeat them with predictable regularity whenever they have a chance: they want us all dead or converted and our civilization destroyed. And yet we wait, always wait for something more horrific to happen to wake up.

Bill Clinton was offered Osama on three occasions, but he deemed that the threat he represented was not sufficient to be bothered (ìYou have to do better, Osama, before I will come and get you!î). Now the conventional wisdom is that it would take a nuke for us to get really, really, serious. Well, Iíd rather get serious before that nuke. Understand, I do not advocate Hiroshima treatment for Mecca ñ yet. But can we at least dispose of that PC nonsense that prevents us from securing the borders? Canít we start deporting ñ there, I said it ñ people who come as guests to this country and openly preach violence against us?

Sorry about the rant, but I have had more than enough.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:52 am 44. c:

This is not a day for quibbling, but Ken Livingstone did use this opportunity to take a socialist jab at the unfairness of mass murdering the working class, instead of their duly elected leaders in the democracies we, to include the working class, hold dear: “I want to say one thing: This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty or the powerful, it is not aimed at presidents or prime ministers, it was aimed at ordinary working-class Londoners,” Mr Livingstone said as he prepared to leave Singapore to return to the capital.

His observation sounds a little like Moore’s lament that alQaeda targeted blue voters and not red ones on 9-11. This is what Livingstone said in November 2003 about our President: “I actually think that Bush is the greatest threat to life on this planet that we’ve most probably ever seen. The policies he is initiating will doom us to extinction.” He also said Bush has “the most corrupt and racist American administration in over 80 years.”

And he is a most vocal supporter of Sheik al-Qaradawi, a controversial radical cleric who justifies the suicide bombings in Israel and martyr attacks against US/UK forces in Iraq and who has been linked to a terrorist bank and banned from entering the States. Livingstone not only welcomed him to London but apologized for “for the outbreak of xenophobia and hysteria in some sections of the tabloid press”, calling him “a moderate cleric, held in respect throughout the Muslim world… who preached tolerance and respect for others.”

May the mayor of the great city of London understand that we should not tolerate and respect those who would justify Islamist murder and martyrdom anywhere, to include Israel and Iraq, and who would commit atrocities against our British and American working classes, as well as our elected leaders.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:57 am 45. ambisinistral:

There will be all sorts of reactions, but what will be of significance is those people that change their views.

Frankly, it is hard to imagine that a person who has supported the War on Terror will view the London bombings and think to themselves, “Oh my gosh, we’ve brought this down upon our own heads.” On the other hand I can see people who were soft on the War on Terror being angered by this and hardening their attitudes.

I wonder what people in the Middle East think about this? How many are dancing around in the streets over another of their glorious “victories”, and how many are increasingly seeing the Salafists as dragging them towards disaster?

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:57 am 46. Syl:

Amen, Katherine.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:00 am 47. Katherine:

Or, and a couple of trials for treason would not hurt, either We just laid our hands of five prime candidates in Iraq.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:01 am 48. Buddy Larsen:

We need to remember we are trying to build up mideast allies–such as free Iraq and the Iraqi armed forces (recently declared by AQ to be an enemy no different that the crusaders)–and thus need to be sober and careful with our language. If one in ten Muslims sympathizes with AQ, then nine of ten doesn’t. For gosh sakes, let’s not declare on those nine. Also, this is good to remember.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:05 am 49. Terrye:

ambi:

I have wondered the same thing. If I were them, I would be nervous.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:08 am 50. Paul:

Katherine:

“You know, I am not exactly keen on this horrific atrocity that is supposed to finally wake us up. ”

I hope you don’t imagine I’m eagerly anticipating the cataclysm that will finally unite us. On the contrary, life as we know it will end on that day. For everyone. I dread it but cannot logically accept that there is any way to forestall it indefinitely short of total war against the Islamic world, and that will not happen until the public is so enraged by some horrific act that they demand the kind of waging of war that ended WW2.

You’ve had more than enough, and so have I and many others, but too many have learned to despise the very system that has provided them so much prosperity and freedom.

These people will only get it when it impacts there lives DIRECTLY, not by watching the WTC towers fall, or massacres in Beslan or Madrid. These acts only cement their twisted views of America’s perfidy and their own superior morality.

When they actually suffer real consequences they will no longer be able to live in the convenient Viet Nam era made up reality of America losing a war, but others elsewhere doing the dying and suffering.

And if you think for one minute that anything we’ve witnessed so far even remotely approaches the effect of a single nuclear attack on American soil, let alone a coordinated one, you are profoundly mistaken.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:24 am 51. Robin Munn:

Side-comment about Chirac: he’s a jerk, agreed, but I don’t think it’s fair to hold the “British food” comments against him. Joking about British food is traditional, even among those who love Britain. I have a great deal of respect for most Brits (though not for appeasers like Galloway), and though British food jokes would clearly be out of place today, I would have made one yesterday and not felt ashamed of it. It’s along the lines of good-natured ribbing.

Now, did Chirac intend it as good-natured, or as a barbed comment? I don’t know — but as much as I dislike him politically, I’m inclined to think it was good-natured ribbing, actually.

Anyhow, that’s not very important. Far more important is continuing to make progress in tracking down and stopping the terrorist cells across the world.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:25 am 52. Syl:

Paul

Please. Seems to me you think we need 100% of people behind this war before it’s effective. We do not. Neither do we need 100% of the muslim world who aren’t directly Islamic fanatics to support us.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:40 am 53. Stephen_M:

FWIWFrom Stratfor

There has been massive confusion over a denial made by the Israelis that the Scotland Yard had warned the Israeli Embassy in London of possible terrorist attacks ÔøΩminutes beforeÔøΩ the first bomb went off July 7. Israel warned London of the attacks a ÔøΩcouple of days ago,ÔøΩ but British authorities failed to respond accordingly to deter the attacks, according to an unconfirmed rumor circulating in intelligence circles. While Israel is keeping quiet for the time being, British Prime Minister Tony Blair will soon face the heat for his failure to take action.

The piece continues (Sorry, no link.):

Israel Warned United Kingdom About Possible Attacks

Summary

There has been massive confusion over a denial made by the Israelis that the Scotland Yard had warned the Israeli Embassy in London of possible terrorist attacks “minutes before” the first bomb went off July 7. Israel warned London of the attacks a “couple of days ago,” but British authorities failed to respond accordingly to deter the attacks, according to an unconfirmed rumor circulating in intelligence circles. While Israel is keeping quiet for the time-being, British Prime Minister Tony Blair soon will be facing the heat for his failure to take action.

Analysis

The Associated Press reported July 7 that an anonymous source in the Israeli Foreign Ministry said Scotland Yard had warned the Israeli Embassy in London of possible terrorist attacks in the U.K. capital. The information reportedly was passed to the embassy minutes before the first bomb struck at 0851 London time. The Israeli Embassy promptly ordered Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to remain in his hotel on the morning of July 7. Netanyahu was scheduled to participate in an Israeli Investment Forum Conference at the Grand Eastern Hotel, located next to the Liverpool Street Tube station — the first target in the series of bombings that hit London on July 7.

Several hours later, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom officially denied reports that Scotland Yard passed any information to Israel regarding the bombings, and British police denied they had any advanced warning of the attacks. The British authorities similarly denied that any information exchange had occurred.

Contrary to original claims that Israel was warned “minutes before” the first attack, unconfirmed rumors in intelligence circles indicate that the Israeli government actually warned London of the attacks “a couple of days” previous. Israel has apparently given other warnings about possible attacks that turned out to be aborted operations. The British government did not want to disrupt the G-8 summit in Gleneagles, Scotland, or call off visits by foreign dignitaries to London, hoping this would be another false alarm.

The British government sat on this information for days and failed to respond. Though the Israeli government is playing along publicly, it may not stay quiet for long. This is sure to apply pressure on Blair very soon for his failure to deter this major terrorist attack.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:44 am 54. nygoblue:

Good thing we invaded Iraq so we could fight the terrorists over there instead of at home, eh?

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:12 am 55. Ron Wrght:

Jamie and Catherine I’m with you,

We can win this war.

The American people and the free world need to know we are at war and what the real stakes are.

No thanks to the LL, the MSM, and the Euro Weenies.

See this post I just sent out:

*****

To All:

I just posted this comment at Jihad-Watch on the tragedy in London this morning.

Please feel free to post or refer to your friends.

It’s time to suck it up and win this war:

Link Here

AND MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA

[God of your choosing or not of course]

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:15 am 56. Old Dad:

Anyone notice that rank smell? Must be the troll.

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:20 am 57. Paul:

Syl:

You’re misconstruing me.

What I am saying is that sooner or later the jihadis will find the means to mount a catastrophic attack. It could take twenty years, or it could be imminent. The effectiveness of the WOT is hard to measure, though thankfully we’ve avoided an attack on American soil since 9-11, so it is not without it’s successes.

However, with porous borders, a large contingent of blame America first types, outrage over Koran defilement at Gitmo, etc., we are setting ourselves up for a fall. There is no way our present course can effectively prevent the threat of a catastrophic attack.

Everything will change on that day. That’s all I’m saying. I am not offering a prescription for success, I’m merely bearing witness to the drama unfolding and making calculations based on my understanding of human nature and historical precedent.

At the risk of misconstruing you, I would venture to suggest you are in denial, because you cannot bear to think the unthinkable.

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:24 am 58. Brit-American:

To reiterate, The Israeli security accompany finance minister Benjamin Netanyahu were warned by the English security services minutes AFTER the first bomb exploded near Liverpool Street Station very near to the building that the FM was scheduled to give a speech.

I think the best course is to appeal to/put pressure on the moderate British Muslim community to encourage the people to cough up the people who murderered their neighbours and friends.

So far everyone has been calm here. We might use the word sad when we wish to use the word angry but that’s not a bad thing. Thinking straight is different from appeasement.

To end on a lighter note

RE: Bad food. Joke from a Brit in response to the Chirac comment whilst holding up a bag of fish and chips – Yeah our food may be lousy and it rains all the time but we won the bid. Ha!

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:24 am 59. Terrye:

nygo:

What do you suggest? Surrender?

The reason I left the Democratic party was that is being run by a lot of smart asses that liked to kick a guy when he was down but could nover come up with anything constructive of their own.

Like say, dealing with AlQaida in the 90’s when they declared war on us…then of course there is the bizarre relationship they have with Saddam that seems to go from threatening to attack him all the way to hero worship.

Maybe you guys should learn how to drive before you give directions to the man behind the wheel.

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:24 am 60. Buddy Larsen:

Terrye, we’d need a semi-annual 911 to dry up that slop. Consider it the sole unpleasant by-product of no 911s since 911 (touch wood). And thank your lucky stars that you’re not a wretch who enjoys the pain of a friend.

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:40 am 61. Ron Wrght:

AMEN BROTHER TERRYE

Excerpt from my essay:

*****

Finally, I have yet to hear a coherent alternative strategic plan put forth by the LL and the MSM to win this war. Until they have a plan worth pursuing, the Honorable Senator Feingold, Senator Kennedy, Senator Kerry, and Senator Durbin can:

SHUT THE @#$% UP!

Their constant gum flapping is sending mix messages to the enemy. This only empowers and emboldens the enemy to kill more innocents and to kill or injure our brave men and women in uniform who go into harm’s way on our behalf. These thoughtless political statements only serve to hurt the morale of our troops. Our military is defending our very way of life, culture, and freedoms we hold dear from the enemy in the GWOT.

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:41 am 62. Kevin P:

Roger:

I understand the need for PM Blair and President Bush to issue caveats in their speech’s that these terrorist actions are not the wish’s of all Muslims. I also understand the need to cultivate allies in the Muslim world. But the arafat style double speak of claiming that they are oppossed to actions like the London bombings and then saying the opposite in arabic thru their government sponsored radical Immans must be pointed out.

I don’t remember his name but when the wheelchair bound head of a Muslim group that planned, paid for, and justified actions just like today’s bombings was killed by IDF forces a large portion of the Muslim world and their governments and religous leaders were outraged. They claimed, and still do, that Israel had killed a “spiritual” leader, they tried to compare it to the assasination of any head of any other religion. Who people choose as their spiritual leader is up to them. But if they are going to mourn someone who says that actions such as the London bombings are ok then don’t be suprised when non-Muslims question there sincerity in regards to their condemnations of these acts.

These are the words of Mohammed Fizazi, a hugely popular Muslim preacher who travelled all over Europe prior to 2001 and whose tapes of his sermons still are very popular in large sections of the Mulslim world. “You have not understood the words of God or the Koran if you believe that the non-believers want to do good” He advocated the killing of all non-Muslims “no matter if it’s a Man, woman or a child.” He also expressed sympathy for those who would take on the orders of God realizing that doing all this killing is a tough job. This preacher talked to many of the 9-11 bombers and he was very popular in many of the Mosques all over Europe.

Yes, I know that not all Muslims subscribe to this belief. But any Mosque that would have Fizazi speak at their Mosque or that would sell his tapes must accept some responsability for his words. Ditto for any government. You can’t proclaim moral outrage in English and then have Muslim preachers speak the reverse in Arabic on state sponsored media and not expect any blowback.

Kevin Peters

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:49 am 63. nygoblue:

I’m not a Democrat, Terrye, though I’ll note that Al Quaeda was on neither party’s radar screen before 9/11, so it’s a bit disingenuous to fault only one party for failing to declare war on Al Quaeda in the 90’s. The Dems may not deserve the keys, but the GOP has already crashed the Mercedes.

Calling for critics to offer an alternative is a rather unconvincing defense of a wrongheaded policy that looks more so with every passing day – is doing nothing really worse than doing something stupid? But if invasion is the way to fight terror, the case against Saudi Arabia, Iran, and even Syria remains much better than the case against Iraq ever was.

Jul 7, 2005 - 11:54 am 64. Kevin P:

Terye:

You are 100% correct. What many on the left are preaching is the exact method we tried in the ‘80,s ‘90,s. We treated it as a police action. We tried to engage the Taliban diplomatically and we didn’t “overreact” to the Cole, the Embassie bombings, the assasination attempt on ex President Bush,the First attempt on the WTC, the funding of palestinian suicide bombers, The outright declaration of War by OBL, and all the rest of the un-nuanced messages that the Islamo fascists sent us. We got 9-11. When 9-11 happened OBL became a hero in a large patch of the Muslim world and many Muslims flocked to join his Holy War. And this was long before any military action by the U.S. We relied on police actions and a diplomatic effort by the U.N. OBL laughed at our stupidity and timidity then and still laughs at those that preach returning to that failed strategy. IT DIDN’T WORK. If you want to fine tune a different approach thats fine with me. But don’t think that we can return to the feel good but stupid policy of the “80’s and “90’s.

Kevin Peters

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:07 pm 65. Steven Mitchell:

Paul, I agree roughly with your conclusion but not all the reasoning that got you there. Specifically, I disagree with what certain people will do that will allow what you say to happen. There are *very* few people left that are unconvinced by 9-11 but persuadable by a more massive (e.g. nuclear) attack. You do, however, have a large number of people “on the other side” that would be marginalized by such an event:

1. Idiots, like the troll above, that couldn’t manage to connect all the dots if they dumped a whole bucket of paint on the paper. Such people are already pretty marginal, but manage to still be annoying.

2. People that know better but are lying for partisan advantage. They have no courage or honor–and thus will only quit this tactic when they see it as no longer to their advantage. A catastrophic attack would stop them, but only as a side effect. Many in the press also fall into this category. (You’ll have a handful of real conversions, as some people can eventually be shamed into the right thing.)

3. Never underestimate the effects of a bandwagon.

Of course, a certain amount of people can only be brought on board for vengeance, not pre-emption. These would fit the pattern you mentioned. And even that tiny slice of potential persuadables I mentioned can make a difference in close political races. But mostly the effect would be that a lot of morons would shut up for awhile. That is why I think Syl is also correct that it will not make a lot of practical difference.

Some of the “chickenhawk” memebots on Totten in the last few days kept talking about how we had the draft in WWII and should have it again if the War on Terror was so important. Ignoring the obvious insincerity for a moment, I couldn’t help but think they made a point that they didn’t intend. We wouldn’t have needed the draft in 1941 if the West had stopped German re-armament and Japanese aggression in the 30s. *If we did what the memebots want, it IS TRUE that we would eventually need the draft.*

I’m actually more interested in the corollary to your main idea. The more success we have, the harder it will be to keep people interested in finishing the job. I’m hoping that the Iraqis will have sufficient motivation to get them over that hump. The Eastern Europeans have certainly not yet forgotten what it means to be chained.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:08 pm 66. Steven Mitchell:

nygoblue, “…is doing nothing really worse than doing something stupid?”

Now if only you would have considered that before you opened your mouth? Though I’ll grant you that it is difficult sometimes. For example, I should know better than to argue with a memebot…

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:13 pm 67. Terrye:

nygo:

Some of these attacks are going to come through no matter what we do. I just think it is more constructive to blame the people who perpetrated the attack than Bush.

And like I said there are plenty of opposition people out there, but very few people who do anything. The blame America first crap is a cheap shot and serves no purpose other than to give aid and comfort. It was one thing to under estimate the enemy a decade ago, but the truth is for a lot of people nothing has changed.

Whatever happens it is the fault of Bush or Israel. How about dealing with reality every now and then?

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:15 pm 68. c:

if invasion is the way to fight terror, the case against Saudi Arabia, Iran, and even Syria remains much better than the case against Iraq ever was.

NYGob, Every one of these invasion scenarios would be utterly unthinkable without our having taken out the criminal Hussein and establishing a presence in Iraq first. That said, I highly doubt we’re ginning up to actually invade and topple these corrupt regimes. There are better ways to intervene and finesse changes in these countries, especially now that we’re in Iraq and the Iraqis are forming a more democratic and less anti-American government. Or, do you believe it to be mere coincidence that Iraq is smack dab in the middle of the kleptocratic, theofascist, secular fascist and terror-spawning region?

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:17 pm 69. Syl:

nygoblue

You have no facts to offer, just assertions. Give us some facts, man, to cover your ass. Until then be happy America is fighting and don’t forget THIS fact: Islamists will use ANY excuse to commit terror. Islamists will use ANYTHING as a recruitment tool. Terrorist attacks themselves are recruitment tools…some of the captured al Qaeda have even stated as much. 911 was the biggest recruitment drive in years.

You’re an infidel. Stop being so frightened that we’re fighting back.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:18 pm 70. David Toube:

It was no accident that Edgware Road, the home to London’s liberal, westernised Arab muslims was targetted.

Or, indeed, Aldgate East, where Bangladeshi muslims live.

Its the “apostates” who have always been the primary targets of the jihadist-Islamists.

When people begin to understand this, they will understand why there is no compromise to be had with the radical Islamists.

Until they do, there will just be a sense of surprise and mystery that British muslims seem to have been the target of this attack.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:20 pm 71. Old Dad:

Trolls are bad enough, but ours stoops to steal from the DKos Kooks.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:20 pm 72. Terrye:

I have as of yet never heard one anti war person blame a terrorist for being a terrorist nor have I heard one explain what the alternative to war should have been. [in the real world, not their fantasy world of kite flying children and laughing flowers].

I guess we should have let Saddam make an ass of us and the UN and kill his own people with impunity and give aid to terrorists both in Iraq and elsewhere.

If we had done all that the world would be a peaceful place and there would be no terrorism.

If you beleive thatg I have some real estate I would like to sell you.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:23 pm 73. The Truth:

What many on the left are preaching is the exact method we tried in the ‘80,s ‘90,s. We treated it as a police action.

Under this approach, which you scoff at, terrorism declined in every year of the last Clinton administration.

The approach you undoubtedly support, that of attacking nations that historically have nothing to do with terrorism, acts of terrorism have risen every year under the first Bush administration.

Other than bloodlust and the propogation of fear, what is your rationale for the latter approach? Because, obviously, it isn’t working.

http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1002

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:25 pm 74. Katherine:

Paul,

I think that Kevin, Steven and Syl are 100% correct. And I seriously doubt whether any of the regular poster here are in denial. I in particular do not have stomach for waiting for the event that would finally unite us all, because I do contemplate the unthinkable, perhaps a little bit too much for my own mental health.

As Steven points out, we are trying not to repeat mistakes that lead to WWII. God knows if we will be successful, though, despite todayís atrocity I remain guardedly optimistic. But try we must, because if we donít the event that you predict will move from the ledger: ìprobabilityî into ìcertaintyî.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:26 pm 75. Katherine:

Yes, indeed, Pravda.

And nice Mr. Hitler stayed true to the Munich agreement ñ right up to the Sep 1st, 1939.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:28 pm 76. Buddy Larsen:

“…obviously, it isn’t working.”

How do you know, TT? All you know is that your head is still attached to the rest of you.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:30 pm 77. ambisinistral:

I’m not a Democrat

Yea, why would anybody think somebody called NY Go Blue is a Democrat? BTW, I am a long-time Democrat — I go all the way back to when they hadf balls in the face of tyranny and believed women didn’t belong in the kitchen much less a giant baggie.

Please tell me your seriously pondering joining the Greens. You would be much more comfortable in their midst. I strongly encourage you to check out their platform. Oh, and be sure to take your doofii pals with you.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:36 pm 78. Terrye:

Truth:

Oh puhleaze.

AlQaida came into existence and declared war on the US during Clinton’s second term.

More Americans died in the 90’s and on 9/11 than have died since we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.

Clinton said that Saddam was a danger to the world and should be removed from power. It was the Clinton administration that said Saddam and AlQaida were linked and it was Clinton that said not only said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction but gauranteed he would use them. And Tony Blair supported him in this assertion.

It was also Clinton that let a half dozen oppurtunities go by to get Osama Bin Laden.

It would be nice if just for one lousy day the left could pretend to blame the terrorists rather than the Republicans.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:36 pm 79. c:

Under this (police action) approach, which you scoff at, terrorism declined in every year of the last Clinton administration.

Goodness, The Truth. What in the world did George Bush do in the first 8 months of his administration to bring about 9-11, which had been planned for years as an attack against Clinton’s “paper tiger” America? (Or was it “toothless” tiger? Surely, ‘lip-biting I-feel-your-pain” tomcat, in any event.)

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:39 pm 80. Fresh Air:

Last time I looked, Osama bin Laden was still honked off about Andalusia–if memory serves that was around 1500 or so. Since the U.S. wasn’t even a nation then, I’m not quite sure how we could be at fault.

BTW, the Big Guy sure has been quiet. Guess it takes a while for his Betamax videos to make their way back to Islamabad on the back of a goat. I hope he’s got on a different outfit next time. I hate that white hat–and the green camo-look is so 2001.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:40 pm 81. Old Dad:

TT,

Acts of war increased precipitously after Pearl Harbor. Damned FDR.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:41 pm 82. Buddy Larsen:

Jihad & the West

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:49 pm 83. jerry:

nygoblue (michigan grad?)

You aaid: “…But if invasion is the way to fight terror, the case against Saudi Arabia, Iran, and even Syria remains much better than the case against Iraq ever was.”

I am going to treat you as a serious poster. You are committing a basic logical fallacy, i.e., a terrorist attack occurred despite our invasion of Iraq so therefore the policy is a failure and should be changed. You are assuming there would have been no further terrorist attacks without the invasion. This is highly unlikely. Al Qaeda had steadily increased the tempo and severity of their attacks in the 1990’s while the US and the rest of the world pursued a highly legalistic passive response policy. OBL has clearly stated his goals and his methods. He wishes to establish the worldwide caliphate and terror is his means to that end. Al Qaeda would be carrying out terrorist attacks whether we were in Iran and Afghanistan or not.

We also know that you are engaging in the x is worse filibuster argument. We went after Iraq because was a necessary but easy target. It was like going after Italy in WWII. Mussolini wasn’t much of threat and didn’t have a lot capability to hurt us. So we went after him first. I suppose that you would argue that it was mistake to go after Italy because why should bother with Mussolini when Hitler was a bigger threat. I suppose we could even have bought him off. I suspect you would not support military action against any terrorist supporting nation be they easy or hard targets because you believe the root cause of terrorism is something like poverty, capitalism, Zionism, etc. Why don’t you be honest and just say that.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:52 pm 84. Fresh Air:

Pravda, you need a logic lesson. Try confusing cause and effect for starters.

When you finish with that homework, try post hoc ergo propter hoc”.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:53 pm 85. Kevin P:

Truth:

During the ‘90,s, the taliban, a theocratic fascist government. During the ’90’s. the Taliban let OBL use their country to build up his terrorist organization. From this spot he brought in islamo fascists from all over the world and set up sleeper cells and carried out the Cole bombings, The African Embassy bombings, the first WTC bombing, and began planning the 9-11 attacks. What was done during the time that you say was so wonderful to get the Taliban to stop letting Al Queda from using ther country as a staging base to carry out their attacks. The governments in the middle east were not pressured one iota to stop their funding of OBL. Instead of treating OBL open declaration of war seriously and attacking him in a serious fashion a occasional missle was thrown about and diplomatic efforts that the taliban just aluhed at were attempted. We even brought some taliban officials to America to try to deal diplomatically with them. The problem is the Taliban had no intention of stopping Al Queda because they were soul brothers who shared the same goals. Democrats and Republicans and all American citizens slept during the ’90’s while OBL planned his attacks with cold calculation.9-11 was planned, financed and the sleeper cells were set up in America while the wonderful diplomatic and police action response to terrorism was carried out. Since you want to go back to that wonderful method then I guess every ten years we can expect a 9-11 style attack. Great idea!

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:54 pm 86. ambisinistral:

Paul,

For what it is worth I agree with you. The salafists are obsessed with big bangs and sooner or later, in the US, Isreal or in Europe, they are going to manage to pull off a large scale nuclear, chemical, or biological attack.

I too believe that when that sad day happens the playing field will change dramatically. Those are taboo weapons, not only will the targetted country be furious, but much of the non-Islamic public around the globe will be furuious as well.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:56 pm 87. Terrye:

The left is so damned predictable.

These bastards could be eating our young and somehow someway somebody else would be at fault.

I have tried to remember when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan if there was any flag burning etc. nope. I don’t remember the left getting all excited about any thing that could not be blamed on America or Israel. Really…think about it.

And then there is the war. Do they care about the UN playing the whore? no…Do they have any viable alternatives as to how we should have responded to the violation of the cease fire by Saddam and the complete disrepect he showed for the UN mandatory resolutions? no….

But when something bad happens they have no problem blaming the US. What if the liberals should win an election? What would they do then if and when the attacks come? Bush will be gone from the White House in a few years but these terrorists are going to be around for awhile and it would be helpful if the opposition came up with a way of dealing with them that was not based on Bush bashing.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:56 pm 88. Steven Mitchell:

I thought Andalusia was more a circa 1200 thing. But what are a few centuries to a jihadist? Anyway, it was mostly downhill after that Tours gig. Even then, it might have worked out OK if all those meddling Normans had lost their gumption after leaving their homeland to the surrender monkeys. Poor Osama, it’s been a rough millennium.

Jul 7, 2005 - 12:58 pm 89. vegetius:

What is really going to be shocking for the Brits is that some of there fellow countrymen (of the Finsbury Mosque stripe) did this to them. This is going to open a new chapter on how Europe is intergrating Muslims into Western society. This did not go down without some inside help.

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:12 pm 90. c:

Here’s a tremendous alliance against evil and defeatism-

“Bloggers call for protests and solidarity” (ht Instapundit):

Bloggers have called for a mass protest against today’s bombings and have insisted that Londoners will not be intimidated by the string of attacks on their city…

Tim Worstall, the leading Brittish blogger said: “Tomorrow we’ll find out whether Britons are, still, in fact, Britons.”

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:13 pm 91. nygoblue:

A lot of folks here seem to be confused. I never said anyone but the terrorists was at fault for the London attacks, 9/11, or any other such atrocity. I merely pointed out that the “flypaper” theory, recently employed to justify the invasion of Iraq, has been undermined by this recent incident. I’m no Galloway – I never said that this latest incident was our fault for invading Iraq. Religious fascists don’t need an excuse to try to kill people they disagree with. I’m all for killing those who would kill us if they had have a chance, I just think the administration hurt that effort by going into Iraq rather than trying to take care of Iran and Syria.

Ambiministral,

“Yea, why would anybody think somebody called NY Go Blue is a Democrat?”

I dunno. Perhaps such person had never heard of the University of Michigan, or could not conceive that alumni thereof might live in New York. I guess some people have to see everything in terms of the Red amd Blue. Try hanging out with Terrye a bit less, as everything seems to be about partisanship for him. Stephen Mitchell, however, is admirable for his courage in calling people names from the safety of his keyboard.

Syl,

I’m all for fighting back. I merely expressed a preference for fighting those most closely associated with our enemies before proceeding to those with a connection that is tenuous at best. For some unfathomable reason you think Iraq had to be first, whereas I think that the mess there will tie our hands when it comes to dealing with more dangerous regimes.

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:16 pm 92. Buddy Larsen:

So, blue, you wouldn’t've done anything different, really–you just wish we had a different president doing it. Is that your point?

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:23 pm 93. vegetius:

nygoblue:

“whereas I think that the mess there will tie our hands when it comes to dealing with more dangerous regimes.” Okay I’ll bite. How would you ‘deal’ with Syria?

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:24 pm 94. Lola:

And How would you ‘deal’ with Iran as well?

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:31 pm 95. Terrye:

nygo:

I am not a him.

As for being partisan I have to say if I had a dollar for everytime someone called me a war monger for voting for Bush I could pay off my mortgage. I guess you could say I have been conditioned.

The fly paper theory does not mean that every single attack will be stopped and if the terrorists know that it is this easy to shake our resolve it seems to me we are inviting more attacks by blaming Bush.

I am just tired of the fact that everytime something awful happens a certain type of person [excuse me if I sound partisan] seems to respoind by saying “Oh goody, a chance for me to me to be morally superior and historically naive, not to mention partisan.”

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:31 pm 96. Syl:

nygoblue

The problem is the world thought Saddam had stockpiles of wmd. And he did have ties to al qaeda…nothing can be proven re ties to 911, but he was friendly enough with Osama’s minions.

So, the first one to go had to be Saddam. With him sitting there, there was little we could do about anyone else.

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:32 pm 97. Steven Mitchell:

Come to my house, and I’ll say it to your face. Right before I throw you out.

Courageous? No, I’m not so stupid as to think that speaking my mind in American involves any particular courage. Merely honesty. Unlike, say, posting slippery, moving goalposts from an anonymous name? I’ll believe you aren’t a memebot when you try to persuade leftist that taking out Iran and Saudia Arabia would be a good idea.

But you will not. If inclined to do so, you wouldn’t have led off with: “Good thing we invaded Iraq so we could fight the terrorists over there instead of at home, eh?” No one *serious* about taking the fight to Iran would say only that in a post.

This is starting to sound just like last week. But then, since you are so couragous that you’ll post your snark under an assumed name, you could be that same person. You get serious about the overthrow of Iran, and we’ll talk. Free hint, it has to be constructive ideas about how to do it with what we have, not pie in the sky, if only nonsense. Jerry is right on with his Italy/Germany analogy.

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:36 pm 98. Terrye:

Oh yes and as for Iraq being first: what country was firing on our planes? What country could be tied to the first attack on the World Trade Center? What country was requiring that billions be spent flying the no fly zones? What country had attempted to kill a president? What country was harboring Zarqawi? What country was responsible for the the fact that we had to keep a base in Saudi Arabia? What country had refused to comply with more than a dozen force resolutions? What country had used chemicals on its own people? What country was in violation of a cease fire?

What country was Clinton referring to in the Iraqi Liberation Act?

I don’t expect everybody to support military action. In fact I can understand a moral aversion to war.

But I get tired of people just plain ignoring reality.

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:39 pm 99. PJ:

Meanwhile, moveon.org is silent on the attack.

Hey, don’t question their patriotism–or their compassion!

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:50 pm 100. Steven Mitchell:

PJ, I don’t question their patriotism at all. I’m fairly certain I already know the answer to that question.

Jul 7, 2005 - 1:57 pm 101. Buddy Larsen:

Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make a five-legged dog (ht war-monger President Abe Lincoln).

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:00 pm 102. PeterUK:

In the wake of such an atrocity, I was going to refrain from answering the moral cretins who make flippant and infantile comments whilst the victims drown in their own blood,their arteries ripped from their hearts by the overpressure.

Victims who lie blind , deaf or maimed in hospital beds,doctors faced with the appalling decisions of triage,grieving relatives,kith and kin who have no news,only that a loved one did not arrive home.

There is only one word for those who make political capital at such a time…SCUM!

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:01 pm 103. Rick Ballard:

Does it always have to be Groundhog Day with the ojectively pro al-Aqueada opposition? I know that we’re not talking about more than double digit IQ’s but do we have to go back to the beginning every day with the Copperheads? Some days “Screw you and your seditionist horse.” ought to be enough.

Lee kept the Army of North Virginia in the field for only four months after Billy Sherman brought Hell to Georgia. Lee and his men undoubtedly had their morale lifted from time to time when they were able to read the Copperhead press but it wasn’t enough to keep them going after Atlanta burned.

I’m much more interested in figuring out what “Atlanta burning” would be to the Islamofascists than I am in reading the education of very, very slow learners.

Do we need to recall our ambassador to the KSA and begin moving troops to its northern border? Should we take out the 350 targets which constitute Iran’s nuclear program? Do we declare Damascus to be within the area covered by a “hot pursuit” doctrine wrt to jihadis coming from Syria? I’ve no interest in seeing US troops occupying another Arab country but I would like to see a firm declaration that Powell’s idiotic “Pottery Barn” formulation no longer pertains. “We’re gonna break it and we don’t give a damn whether it gets fixed or not.” needs a good trial.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:13 pm 104. Luther McLeod:

PeterUK

Good to hear from you. I was worried. Condolences to you and your fellow countrymen.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:18 pm 105. Ron Wrght:

Terrye,

May be it would help that people being to realize Iraq is only one battles of many in the GWOT.

Iran is probably next. Did anyone notice the grand poohba threw his support to the ultraconsertive Mayor of Tehran? The grand poohba broke ranks with the other Mad Mullahs of Iran.

Why digress from the false facade of the “reformist” face that was working?

Me thinks, they know something we don’t

Maybe they have what they want now (Islamic Nuke) and they’re coasting let the clock run out late in the 4th Qtr while our attention is diverted.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:18 pm 106. Buddy Larsen:

Ron, the IDF has recently procured from USA a KC-135 or two (airborne tanker), plus 600 ground-penetrator bunker-busters. Surely somebody who is trapped on that playing field has an eye on the clock.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:30 pm 107. Kevin P:

PeterUK:

So glad to see that you are ok. Your words are perfection and get to the true heart of the various trolls who don’t stop for a second to look at the victims and hold off on their bile and simply repeat the infantile Michel Moore rhetoric that seems to give them a sense of purpose in their pathetic life. Just to repeat a earlier post we are praying for all of you, the courageous assisitance of our cousins across the Atlantic will never be forgotten and that we will prevail even if we are saddled with these self loathing citizens who have no sense of moral clarity.

Kevin Peters

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:32 pm 108. Charlie (Colorado):

Two quick points:

Steven Mitchell, the magic number here is 1492, as in “Columbus sailed the Ocean Blue”. Ferdinand and Isabella had just thrown out the Moors and united Spain when the Italian guy filed his grant application.

Re John Derbyshire, John’s actually a friend of mine, but I’ve got to say i found his depressing take rather reassuring, because I cannot for the life of me remember an occasion on which he’s made a doom-and-gloom prediction that turned out to be right.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:34 pm 109. Terrye:

Ron:

It might be even more helpful if they refrained from saying I told you so I told you so, don’t forget I told you so..

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:40 pm 110. Terrye:

Peter:

Good to hear from you.

And I agree. scum is the word.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:41 pm 111. Luther McLeod:

“Pottery Barn”…that’s a good one Rick. I wholeheartedly agree that more particular and distinct pressure, violent or otherwise, needs to be applied to the countries that harbor, finance or in any other way supports/encourages the cowardly asses who believe indiscriminate bombing will further their cause. I’ll also be waiting for the ‘moderate’ muslims to rise up and condemn, by actions, not words, that 10%(?) of their faith who it is claimed, do not ‘really’ represent their religion. It just seems as if we are not doing enough to rid the world of these nihilistic murderers.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:51 pm 112. PeterUK:

Luther and Kevin,

Thank you,I find those with such a lack of proportion alarming,it seems only a few steps away from concentration camp guard.

Our resident psychiatric team might correct me,but I am sure the SS who used to R&D at Auschwitz thought they were as equally righteous.

This bunch of ghouls don’t even wait until the bodies are cold,Jesus Wept! Can they not even observe a period of mourning,have they no common humanity?

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:53 pm 113. Terrye:

I heard that one of the guys involved in this was recently released from the gulag at Gitmo.

Anybody else know anything about that? Maybe some bad Marine peed on his Koran or something.

the world has gone mad.

Jul 7, 2005 - 2:56 pm 114. Steven Mitchell:

Rick and Luther,

I’d think that one “Atlanta Burning” moment would be when the free Iraqi army pursues some terrorists across the Syrian or Iranian border during a hot pursuit. Remember that Sherman’s campaign was directed at the plantation owners as much as anyone. It was only indirectly meant to affect Lee. No one hates having smoke blown in his face quite like a militant ex-smoker. I imagine a democratic Iraq will be able to work up enough steam to be willing to go the indirect route.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:01 pm 115. dougf:

Some days “Screw you and your seditionist horse,” ought to be enough.–RB

And it is exactly that thought that has restricted my posting remarkably.

Every day seems like that day to me. I feel like popeye. I’ve had I can stands; I can’t stands no more !!

Perfidious,seditious,defeatist,TRAITOROUS. Whichever word you pick, the result is exactly the same. Enough is well and truly enough.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:02 pm 116. Ron Wrght:

Sorry – Terrye

I should have said,

Amen Sister Terrye

I saw someone was asking about Iran. That’s great because someone with common sense is thinking outside of the box.

The single greatest thing that the Blogos can do right this moment is go to Dr. Zin’s site and repost his information:

http://www.regimechangeiran.com

He is the pivotal Blogos portal to spark off the world’s first digital revolution. The Joyless Generation of Iran is ripe to overthrow the Mad Mullahs of Iran. They are very aware that there is more to life than the Islamofascist theocracy can or will provide. Only problem is the Mullahs have hired armed thugs from Pakistan to keep the masses in line.

We can deliver a crushing if not fatal blow to the enemy in the GWOT with the fall of the Iranian regime.

The LL and the MSM have failed to educate and inform the American people of this critical information or reported that there have been massive demonstrationsin Iran over the last several months.

They’ve been too focused on GITMO and the Wacko Jacko Trial.

Go to Dr Zin’s and read further. Help support his site to stay afloat. The cost of which is mere peanuts compared to a full scale assault by coallition forces.

The majority of Iranians do like America. They are a proud and very nationalistic people. An invasion would not go over well for anyone.

Don’t think for one minute that this administration will blink and let the Mad Mullahs go nuclear. The consequences of this for the free world are unimaginable.

One of the key factors is the Iranian people need to know the American people and the free world will support them in their struggle for freedom.

Go figure! The Mad Mullahs are actively blocking and filtering Dr. Zin’s site and other key portals in the Blogos that provide alternative sources of information to the Iranian people.

If we all unite and pitch in and mirror sig info, there is no way they can block us all.

If you are a fan of FOX Network’s “24 Hours” do you see a concealed hand in all of this?

Could it be China is behind the scenes fanning and supporting the madness of radical Islamofascism? Who gave Iran missile and nuke tech? Are they attempting to create a power vacuum in the world in which to move into?

Gee, perphaps our IT giants e.g. IBM, MS, Covad, Cisco, Intel, and Motorola, could show a little patriotism for the home team and at least disable the system blocks that China has errected so that the Chineese people can access alternative sources of information. This is a global war. Would we allow the enemy to have air superiority over the battlefield? Hell No!

The GWOT is a war of words, ideas, culture, ideology, and religion. This war will not be won on the ground alone. We must show the world that these tryannical ideologies that do not recognize the universal truth of the free will of men and women are destined to failure.

So why let the enemy have the free run of Cyberspace? Let’s tear down these walls. As President Reagan said:

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

[...]

Link to full speech

The TRUTH is a very powerful weapon that will defeat this enemy of hate and evil.

Blessed be for the Net and the Blogos!

And May God Bless America!

[GOD of your choice or not]

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:06 pm 117. Kevin P:

PeterUK:

That is the most distressing aspect of posters like nygoblue and the truth. Their first posts don’t even bother to recognize the suffering of our trusted allies and send a hint of sympathy to those who are grieving. They launch right into their nyah nyah nyah partisan snarking and anklebiting. They didn’t bother recognizing the suffering of our friends because they just do not give a damn. They showed more moral outrage over the inane “koran abuse” drivel then the death and suffering of our brothers and sisters in this battle against outright evil.

Kevin Peters

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:07 pm 118. Frederick:

PeterUK:

“There is only one word for those who make political capital at such a time…SCUM!”

Yes. The day after 9/11, my wife’s English uncle sent us a gloating email to the effect that Bush would not be able to do anything about it. My reaction was visceral. But he’s not really a bad man, just a pathetic fool. That’s what the The Truth and nygoblue posters here are. God bless you all. You have friends. We will go forward together.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:10 pm 119. Bostonian:

RB, Dougf–

The war about the war is almost as bad as the war.

(Not really, but I keep thinking it anyway.)

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:13 pm 120. neo-neocon:

I agree with Katherine and Terrye and those who say that not even an attack as egregious as this will budge most of the US-blaming left one iota from their position. If Beslan didn’t do it, what ever would?

I posted this thread on my blog about today’s bombing and the race between the forces of destruction and those of preservation. A leftist commenter responded with the following, which I think is a typical example of the genre–almost mind-boggling in its dreamlike simplicity and in the concise way it manages to work in several basic themes at once:

I have a novel way to stop terrorism:

Treat people fairly and with dignity, like you would like to be treated, and they will never harm you.

Unfortunately that wasn’t part of the Eisenhower Doctrine, or European colonialism.

Perhaps it’s time to write it in.

People like that are delusional, and there’s really no way to reach them with rationality. I don’t usually even respond–what’s the point? However, today for some reason I did–my response was rather short:

As Jake Barnes said in The Sun Also Rises, “Isn’t it pretty to think so?”

The more vicious and barbaric the attacks grow, the more some people will blame, not the attackers, but the US. I think this post by Neuro-Con (that’s not “neo-neocon” by the way, that’s “Neuro-con”, another blogger) offers some interesting speculations about this phenomenon. Note particularly point number 5, part of which is taken from a comment by Michael McCanles at Belmont Club:

“Fear of envy” (i.e., the “evil eye”) is for anthropologists a major embodiment of this narrative’s central obsession. Thus: Islam must hate us because “we” have robbed them of something that they want: thus the incongruous overlay of the marxoid group-conflict model on top of terrorist motivations. The nice thing about this narratival explanation is that it allows the teller a hidden modicum of control. If we can say “they are attacking us because of something that we have done, then all we have to do is correct it by giving them what they want, and all will be well. Thus we control the situation because our actions are the root of the evil being done us.” This is why leftists are so dedicated to scapegoating and fingerpointing.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:14 pm 121. PeterUK:

Kevin,

The Koran is a Holy Book,those who are murdered are by definition are not amongst the anointed of the liberal left elite,why else would they be killed?

It is time we brought back shame.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:17 pm 122. Bostonian:

I am reminded of one of my favorite quotes, something I found in the LGF comments section some time ago:

In the late morning of 9-11-01, all previous political and ideological groups in this country spontaneously reorganized themselves into two new ones – the Sane and the Insane.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:30 pm 123. timmah!:

“The war about the war is almost as bad as the war”

It’s bad, though, isn’t it? When I read a good book about history, I get the sense that when the deeds were getting done, nobody knew what the outcome would be, and it really wasn’t clear to everybody what was the right way forward, and there was no shortage of fools saying to go down roads that look pretty awful today. It’s really not enough to fight Islamonuts, we also need to struggle against the anyone-but-us crowd.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:37 pm 124. Rick Ballard:

Perhaps the first thing to be done is to encourage the Iraqi’s to be expeditious in the appeals process concerning the terrorists in Iraq currently sentenced to death. Some of these terrorists were taken in flagrante and have confessed completely. Establishment of the rule of law and respect for the same requires the exaction of justice. To my knowledge, not one terrorist in the world – including Danny Pearl’s convicted killer – has paid the correct price. It’s time to begin.

I see no reason why the mad mullahs and Saudi sheiks and princelings should live lives free from the terror that they support. We have the means to aid those seeking regime change in Iran and the KSA to make terror very real to those who preach the sermons and fund al-Queada.

Jul 7, 2005 - 3:40 pm 125. Jamie Irons:

Kevin P.

Adressing PeterUK you wrote:

That is the most distressing aspect of posters like nygoblue and the truth. Their first posts don’t even bother to recognize the suffering of our trusted allies and send a hint of sympathy to those who are grieving. They launch right into their nyah nyah nyah partisan snarking and anklebiting. They didn’t bother recognizing the suffering of our friends because they just do not give a damn. They showed more moral outrage over the inane “koran abuse” drivel then the death and suffering of our brothers and sisters in this battle against outright evil.

Exactly.

You know, we label these fools “trolls,” but they are really more like houseflies.

Omnipresent, ineradicable pests without a shred of sense or sensibility.

jamie Irons

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:07 pm 126. PeterUK:

It appears that the main problem is that this war is being fought by means designed to assuage the sensibilities of the liberal left rather than defeat the enemy.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:08 pm 127. Jamie Irons:

And Peter

My thoughts and prayers are with you and your great nation.

We will not let you down.

Jamie Irons

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:09 pm 128. Sandy P:

Sometimes 1 just says, Hmmmmm………..

Via Rantburg:

BAGHDAD, July 7 (UPI) — Iraq’s Interior minister said a “terrorist cell” of eight officers, who planned to bomb the ministry building, has been uncovered at the ministry. Baker Jaber Solagh told a news conference in Baghdad Thursday that the cell conspired with the terrorist group led by Abu Musab Zarqawi to assassinate dozens of senior ministry officials and to bomb the Interior Ministry building. He said it comprised eight officers, including three colonels and a captain, in the internal security forces.

Additional: Iraqi security forces have foiled a plot by senior police officers to bomb the Interior Ministry. Interior Minister Bayan Solagh says that the police officers were linked to Al Qaeda. “We arrested over the past few days a secret military network comprising eight senior police officers and other policemen from the 2nd Brigade who were linked to the so-called Zarqawi group,” he said. The 2nd Brigade is responsible for the police car pool.

(Interesting, that may explain how car bombers get past security into police stations, they’re driving official cop cars from the motor pool.)

“The network intended to assassinate top officers and completely destroy the Interior Ministry,” he said. He refused to give further details.

“The officers were recruited a year ago and were in their jobs before I took over,” the Minister, who was appointed in May, said. Mr Solagh is a member of the Unified Iraqi Alliance, a Shiite-backed group which has called for purging the Interior Ministry of former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party. (Looks like he was right.)

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:11 pm 129. Luther McLeod:

Great quote… Sane and Insane. That truly appears to be the case. It’s frustrating that some can be so deluded. I’m not talking about the socialists/marxists, nor the greens, nor the anti-globalists. At least they are upfront about their hatred of this country. I can deal with that. I’m talking about the 80% of the dem party who are so infused with BDS that they can explain away any attack on this country or on its allies as being the fault of GWB. Oh, if he had only done this, if he’d not done that, its all the Christer’s fault. They just cannot, even for a brief instance, open their minds and consider the ludicrousness’s of their position. And to think I was one once. The shame. I have to say, I thank Steven Den Beste, just about every day, for his writings. But the thing is, I cannot get anyone (on the Insane side) to read anything that conflicts with their world view. They ask, why did you change? I say, I’m too inarticulate to explain, read this, or look at this blog. The reply is always, no thanks, that’s just VRW propaganda. Maybe the “war about the war” here could use a little “Atlanta Burning” itself.

Apologize for the rant, it was brought on by a reply I received this morning after I related the news of the attacks today.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:23 pm 130. Kyda Sylvester:

Good to hear from you, Peter. God speed.

Fox News reports that two unexploded bombs were found:

U.S. authorities confirmed to FOX News a report that British police found two unexploded bombs in London after the morning attacks. Authorities investigating the blasts also recovered parts of explosive timing devices from some of the wreckage sites, FOX News has confirmed. The evidence should help in the search for who was behind the bombings.

Contrary to earlier reports that a homicide bomber may have been involved in the bus attack, authorities now believe that all four explosions were detonated by timing devices.

Tony Blair’s speech: full text

When they try to intimidate us, we will not be intimidated, when they seek to change our country, our way of life by these methods, we will not be changed. When they try to divide our people or weaken our resolve, we will not be divided and our resolve will hold firm.

We will show by our spirit and dignity and by a quiet and true strength that there is in the British people, that our values will long outlast theirs.

The Corner links to a chilling piece that I remember reading last year–Terror on the dole:

Sayful, the only married one in the group, prepares to go home to his wife and children. Before he departs, he says he has a message to deliver.

“I want to warn that the police raids – if repeated – could create a bad situation.

“Islam is not like Christianity, where they turn the other cheek. If they raid our homes, it could lead to the covenant of security being broken.

“Islam allows us to retaliate. That would include” – he tugs his “Jihad” coat tight against the night air – “by violent means.”

Andrew McCarthy has a piece at NRO describing how the British government has hamstrung itself in the fight against terror. I’d welcome your comments, Peter.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:34 pm 131. Steven Mitchell:

Luther, anyone can “see the light”, even Saddam–though some people are a lot less likely than others. But for many people, it isn’t due to anything that we can say or do. They have to want it themselves.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:37 pm 132. c:

PeterUK makes a good point about bringing back shame, but leftists and Islamofascists seem intent only in assigning blame to the West, to Bush and Blair, and to America and Israel for acts of terrorism against our countries. These moral relativists and immoral absolutists are a resentful, self-hating and scapegoating lot; why would they feel shame over countenancing mass murder when their grievance is so righteous? More important is how the rest of us will react, how the wonderful and resilient but increasingly multi-culti minded British will view this atrocity in days to come. Melanie Phillips is holding her breath:

…It is impossible to overstate the pernicious influence of the viciously anti-American, defeatist, appeasement-minded media and intellectual class, which has quite simply shifted the centre of moral gravity and subjected the country to a remorseless diet of distortions, lies and illogicality…

On the other hand, the British who are so slow to anger are bloody-mindedly warlike when finally roused. How they react to today’s obscenity will be a critical turning point in this war. As we grieve for those who have lost their lives or who have sustained terrible injury in today’s act of war, we must also hold our breath.

My bet is on the Britons rising to the occasion as they always have and fighting with courage and conviction.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:43 pm 133. Rick Ballard:

“It is impossible to overstate the pernicious influence of the viciously anti-American, defeatist, appeasement-minded media and intellectual class, which has quite simply shifted the centre of moral gravity and subjected the country to a remorseless diet of distortions, lies and illogicality…”

They get the NYT in the UK? And why is she following Professor Cole?

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:49 pm 134. Kyda Sylvester:

Hugh Hewitt has transcript of Al Franken and Tom Oliphant on Air America this morning. In case you want to save yourselves the aggravation, I’ll capsulate it for you: It’s all Bush’s fault.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:50 pm 135. PeterUK:

It is time we sat the jihadis down with some footage of WWI and WWII just to give them a flavour of what we are capable of and the sacrifices we will make when circumstances demand.

When death isn’t a brief explosion and a journy to Paradise,but hanging from the barbed wire with a head wound crying for ones mother for days on end until one of you comrades can stand it no longer and puts you out of your misery..

The stupid ignorant deluded fools have no concept of the horrors of modern mechanised warfare.

Jul 7, 2005 - 4:56 pm 136. timmah!:

Peter,

They also have no concept of nuclear warfare. One of the scarier moments in the Pakistan/India confrontation in the 90’s was when a poll showed that a large fraction of Pakistanis thought they should just get right to the nukes. Basically, they thought this was just another weapon, only a little bigger and somehow it trumped everything else.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:08 pm 137. Bostonian:

Peter, I’m right there with ya.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:20 pm 138. Buddy Larsen:

Rummy said today, off-handedly, something admiring about “British steel”.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:28 pm 139. Rick Ballard:

It sure would be nice if one of the unexploded bombs had a note in it that said “I’m Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and I approve this message.” Or even a “Made in Iran” sticker.

Just to help in figuring out where to start the bombing raids.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:28 pm 140. Paul:

I would like to offer a clarification regarding my posts about a truly horrific attack “uniting” us:

First I specifically mentioned the incorrigible Michael Mooreons who are irredeemably anti-American. Nothing will bring them to their senses. I do believe however that a great many more than the 52% who voted for Bush and the current prosecution of the WOT will be united in a demand for massive retaliation and an escalation to total war against radical Islam when people finally realize that THEIR lives and way of life is under immediate lethal threat, not just the empathetic outrage that we feel for the victims of 9-11 or Beslan. Posters here canÔøΩt understand how anyone who isnÔøΩt moved by Beslan can be moved at all. Well itÔøΩs because it doesnÔøΩt fit with their narrative of all evil being engendered by the racist sexist West, so they turn away and focus on the Downey Street memos, or Abu Ghraib, and Beslan goes down the memory hole. These people wonÔøΩt be able to turn away from reality when it enfolds them in the horrors of post-Nuclear America.

I can’t stress enough how Viet Nam gave millions of Americans the notion that we could lose a war and not actually suffer any personal repercussions. Historically losing a war means death and destitution for the vanquished. For Americans post Viet Nam it was sex, cocaine, discos, and bad fashion. They will change their tune when they are paying with their own blood and treasure, rest assured.

I also believe that when the first American city is annihilated that anyone foolish enough to protest with pictures of Che or paper mache puppets will be beaten senseless, and no Senator will dare compare our soldiers to Nazis. The anti-American left will be strangled when the full fury of Jacksonian America is finally roused.

I just don’t see our present PC approach to the WOT, coupled with the huge contingent of anti-war leftists efforts to simultaneously stymie our prosecution of the war whilst giving aid and encouragement to the enemy, as being anywhere near sufficient to defeat the fanatical, suicidal determination of the Jihadis. I’m sorry, but we won’t defeat these people with half measures, and the political will to do what needs to be done is simply not there. Yet.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:29 pm 141. Katherine:

Same here, Peter.

Despite of what you all may think I am in general pretty gentle person. But I swear I wish nothing but bloody, excruciating, never-ending pain on those bastards. And yes, I do think that the female of the specie is deadlier than the male.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:32 pm 142. PeterUK:

Timmah,

I don’t think they would have to be brough further up to date than the Somme,all the bravery,all tge belief in ones cause are as nothing inthe face of artillery and machine guns.

Despite the bravado,I do not think that the Jihad could accept the entire male populations of towns and villages being gone in a morning. Not just the individual suicide statement but tens of thousands in a few hours.

I don’t think they could stand the impersonal futility.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:36 pm 143. Katherine:

ìI can’t stress enough how Viet Nam gave millions of Americans the notion that we could lose a war and not actually suffer any personal repercussions.î

Paul, you make a good point. Not being present here at the time I think I missed the ìwe-can-lose-the-war-and-still-be-coolî implications. Kerryís Boomers need to get checked into assisted living facility as soon as possible, if this country is to survive.

I apologize if my posts were cranky. Death of innocent people has bad effect on me, I am afraid.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:40 pm 144. Bostonian:

Cranky suits the occasion.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:42 pm 145. Kyda Sylvester:

It is time we sat the jihadis down with some footage of WWI and WWII just to give them a flavour of what we are capable of and the sacrifices we will make when circumstances demand.

But what do we do with those within our borders who, whether through ignorance or malice, serve and succor the jihadis’ cause? I’m beginning to think it’s the more arduous battle because our options are so few. Bombing raids are out. Can’t send ‘em to Gitmo (well we can’t, can we?). We can’t even shut ‘em up.

Powerline has a rather dispiriting report from Charmaine Yoest in London:

Londoners gently reproached me about my concern over the bloodshed, “You Americans get sentimental over silly things. We’re used to getting bombed.” The IRA Troubles had hardened hearts as well as the London infrastructure.

A young British black woman told me, “The bombings are Tony Blair’s fault – they killed a 100 thousand Iraqis – and it’s like a boomerang [coming back at the British].” Most everyone I talked to believed that the British caused the bombing or had it coming.

Of the dozen or so people I interviewed only white males in business attire expressed surprise that anyone would think the British were at fault in anyway. But these gentlemen were the minority. Most felt that the Brits were complicit. The people at London’s ground zero were sounding like the “wobbly” Spanish after their train bombings.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:48 pm 146. PeterUK:

Katherine,

Personally I favour the oubliette,no violence,no torture,it allows no bravery,no grand gestures,no defiance,just throw them in and leave.

I have been inside one carved out of the solid rock,just a flask shaped chamber with no flat surfaces and an evil little drainage hole in the middle,we turned the lights out to get the flavour of things……………

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:51 pm 147. Katherine:

I see your point, Peter, but then I think that the punishment meted to the Guy Fawkes et al. had some merits, too.

Jul 7, 2005 - 5:58 pm 148. PeterUK:

Katherine,

Hanging drawing and quartering would give them an opportunity to grand stand,not much,but they need a lesson in futility and insignificance,the lesson that we learned in the 20th century,that they are not glorious martyrs but absolutely and utterly unimportant.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:06 pm 149. Bostonian:

PeterUK,

That works for me.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:12 pm 150. Katherine:

Peter,

Thatís why we need for a drum roll. No speaking to the crowds. Besides, do you see any of the losers standing tall why facing that kind of death?

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:18 pm 151. PeterUK:

Katherine,

I would prefer the budding Jihadi to leave home with his packed lunch and AK47 he got for his tenth birthday and simply disappear …forever..never to arrive at his detination,no closure for the family,no body, no glory of martyrdom,no example to following generations,no legends….simply gone.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:42 pm 152. Paul:

Katherine:

No offense taken to your crankiness:-)

We both are on the same side, and we both live and-or work inside the belly of the beast. I don’t need to tell you the disconnect that the LLLs must have in order to go on treating their comfortable and luxurious existence as a bestowal while they avidly agitate to undermine its foundation. These people are weak, self centered, and undisciplined to the core and will quickly fall apart when real adversity smashes into their fantasy world.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:55 pm 153. Steven Mitchell:

Paul, first the American south did survive losing a war, albeit considerably more changed than what the hippies went through. And I think it affects the south more than Vietnam ever did.

“I’m sorry, but we won’t defeat these people with half measures, and the political will to do what needs to be done is simply not there. Yet.”

This is where we disagree, on causes if not effects. I say the political will is there now. The people with the will know, however, that there is still relatively strong will, “on the other side”. A catastrophic attack won’t do much to increase will to get the job done. It would do a lot to squash the opposition’s will.

WWII was not, in fact, near the all-encompassing, united in one purpose, love fest that we make it out to be today. There is a certain amount of history rewriting–same as all those people that knew the Soviet Union was doomed–same as they knew Reagan was an idiot for predicting said doom.

There *was* considerable agreement, by the people with the will to actually do something about Pearl Harbor, that smashing Japan and Germany was the goal, one way or another. There were a lot of other people that weren’t sure, but went along with it. I’ve met many from the era honest enough to admit it. (I do not mean to imply, in any shape, form, or fashion, that we are as united today as we were over WWII … only that we were not nearly as united over WWII as is now popularly believed. For practical purposes, getting 60% buy-in will pretty much move the country. And 60% buy-in with a reasonable press will result in far more than 60% overt support from political leaders.)

So what we need out of the left is not so much aid as self-examination. They don’t need to have the answers. They only need to know that they don’t have the answers. Then shut up, get out of the way, and let people with the answers get the job done. If they happen to see some particular area where they can contribute–then by all means jump in and help.

Hmm, I think some of this relates to my thoughts on the subtle fault lines between the regular posters here. I’ll try to express those in a follow-up post.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:55 pm 154. Katherine:

Peter, what you have in mind is a ìDisappear A Jihadiî operation. What kind of forces do you think would be best for that? Need to lobby Republicans on the budget increases for the correct military branch.

Jul 7, 2005 - 6:57 pm 155. Rick Ballard:

Peter,

If Tony would care to try out “Disappear a Jihadi” in a wholesale manner, I’m sure everyone here would be happy to petition W to let him take a couple of wings of B-2’s for a spin over the weekend. Just gas ‘em up before putting them back in the garage.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:14 pm 156. Katherine:

Rick,

Thanks for the answer. BTW, is it possible to sponsor a B-2 bomber?

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:19 pm 157. rod:

late to the party, but there’s much work to be done.

FWIW, i know a ittle about terrorism. I cover it for a big NYC paper, at least the financial ends of it.

NYgoblue, the truth: I have interviewed the leaidng figures in terrorism/counter-terrorism within the Clinton admin. To a man, they make very clear that they would have hit afghanistan in force by ‘99. The problem: Clinton, STate and their Euro-arabist orientations. They offer nothing but praise for GWB on this account. Viz Iraq, they have serious problems. Many of them, if they had their druthers would have had hit Iran and or Syria in a series of prolonged commando raids. Think: Dieppe, without the 1900 dead and defeat. Again, FWIW. If you wish to elevate Clinton’s so-called startegy for terror, I think you should know what the men who formulated the policy say.

I mean no harm to the posters here, many of whom are sharply brighter than I, but I disagree over assessments of British resolve. I think if they could–without utterly alienating America–the Brits would abandon any military presence in the WoT, it’s that unpopular over there. When Blair leaves, so will Brit. troops from the theater.

this is an odd war. Our troops will fight and die so that the world’s civilians can have the freedom to resent us.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:25 pm 158. richard mcenroe:

But quick! The important question ó What does Dick Durbin think of this?

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:31 pm 159. PeterUK:

Katherine,

The budget need not be a problem,I’m sure Oliver North has a few ideas,as to troops, why not let the ones we have loose to do the jobs they are trained for.There will be areas of Saudi and Syria which can be designated the disappearing ground,which would be jihadis enter and never leave.

Our SAS are trained to extract people,I’m sure that those who disappeared Jimmy Hoffa would advise for an amnesty,

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:38 pm 160. Luther McLeod:

Somber post rod. We shall see. Yes, richard, that is the vital question

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:39 pm 161. Steven Mitchell:

(Let it be understood, for purposes of clarity and conciseness, that “liberal” in this post means “liberal in the best sense of the word, especially classical liberal.” Futhermore, I consider such a label a high compliment, though I only have a small streak of classical liberalism in my makeup. Many people have bits of different such streaks in them–and of course change over time. Finally, I’m posting a hunch, not even something I would yet call a hypothesis.)

It has been famously said that a conservative is a liberal mugged by reality. Yet, it is also said that conservatism is a temperament, not an ideology. I’m beginning to think the latter a bulls-eye and the former somewhat off the mark.

Many of you here are, I submit, liberals. You were always liberals. There is no such thing as a “911 conservative”. However, there is such a thing as a liberal mugged by reality. You could call such a person a “neo-conservative,” I suppose, though it is again slightly off the mark. Rather, I think what we today call a “neo-conservative” is a plain, old-fashioned liberal.

In contrast, the conservative temperament did not need to be mugged by reality. Or at least, it didn’t need to be mugged the way we usually mean it. A conservative sometimes needs to be “blessed by reality”. (This goes way beyond such petty designations as optimist and pessimist. A conservative is often optimistic. It might be said that a conservative never truly believes that a person can be reasoned into virtue, despite exceptions.) The conservative already knew instinctively that putting a spoke in Saddam’s wheel was an inherently good thing. The only reasonable discussion was over means, opportunity, and consequences.

Let me confess that I still do not believe in “nation building”. Yet, I support what we are trying to do in Iraq. As a conservative, I believe that a democracy in Iraq would put a great many spokes through a great many deserving wheels. But the success or failure is not something we control, having removed the impediments. If the Iraqis want it enough, they get it. If they don’t, they don’t. Period.

This is where the liberal/conservative alliance arises–embodied in George Bush’s plan for Iraq. Yes, I said, “plan”. The conservative part is removing impediments. The liberal part is the conviction that the Iraqis do, in fact, want liberty enough–and only need specific help. The alliance is what gives it a chance.

Let me explain that previous sentence. You liberals can’t do this alone. One of the reasons you can’t, is because you’ll do what so many people are lately demanding. You’ll “over” plan. Invariably, this will mean the US making decisions that should be made by Iraqis. You’ll try nation building in a place that hasn’t been razed first. Conservatives can’t do it alone, either. We could smash up the Middle East, put in some regional governors for a few decades, and if we got very lucky end up with something like Hong Kong. But the plan is far more audacious than that. The plan is to react to what the Iraqis do and evolve operational plans as needed.

So there exists this tension between the liberals and the conservatives that results in a very narrow compromise. So the Iraqis do want liberty enough? OK, we’ll find out. We’ll let them really run things. We’ll hold you liberals to your principles. And the liberals return the compliment. They say that there are *specific* ways in which we can help, and ought to help. We’ll get fooled at times, sometimes make mistakes–but sometimes it will work. If human nature is as constant as you conservatives believe, then some of our surprises will even be pleasant ones.

Not coincidently, this is pretty close to the compromise in ideology that produced the US Constitution. You could say that the American Founding fathers did not need to be mugged or blessed by reality.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:43 pm 162. Paul:

Stephen Mitchell:

Using history as a template for predicting an event without historical precedent is problematic.

Pearl Harbor or 9-11 are as a bee sting is to a rattlesnake bite compared to a nuclear attack on an American city. Judging how people reacted in the 1940s with the threat largely outside of Fortress America, and with a population that was infinitely less riven than today is not necessarily a very good measure. While there was some disagreement about the wisdom of entering WW2 it’s hard to imagine at that time American citizens demonstrating in the streets carrying the enemy’s flags, calling for the impeachment of the President, and the defeat of America.

I agree that the political will is there now to do what we are doing. I don’t believe what we are doing is sufficient to win the war, however. It is enough to slow down the enemy, but not enough to prevent the attack that will change the course of history and the way of life we presently enjoy.

I strongly disagree that such an attack won’t alter the will of the people in a big way. It will, because it will affect everyone directly in a way that 9-11 could not possibly. It will indelibly alter everyone’s day to day life in ways that few people can imagine.

I also believe that at that time the Jacksonian element in this country will take the gloves off with regards to the enemy within and finish them off. That is the only good thing that will come of this.

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:46 pm 163. Buddy Larsen:

Belmont asks (snip from “Waiting for Disaster”):

Winston Churchill knew the dynamic of appeasement well.

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”

What odds would you give the West?

Jul 7, 2005 - 7:59 pm 164. Luther McLeod:

Well asked by Wretchard, my simple answer, about the same as the last election. Not much room for error. Damn it all.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:13 pm 165. thibaud:

An overlooked fact that explains a great deal: ground zero for these attacks, Edgware Road, is the UK’s muslim capital. When the UK’s first Islamic Bank recently opened, its first branch was sited on Edgware Road.

In fact, Edgware and Aldgate East (another area targeted by the bombers) comprise the most dense aggregations of muslims in Britain, if not in Europe. Edgware Road is to muslims as Bensonhurst is to Italian-Americans or South Boston to Irish-Americans.

So for a muslim to set off bombs in Edgware Road is like a Boston-based IRA operative setting off bombs in Dorchester or Southie. Now why would they do such a thing if the aim were to protest Britain’s involvement in Iraq? In that case, certainly Whitehall or Westminster would have been logical targets, just as the Pentagon and White House were targets on 9/11.

Now, it’s a stretch, but one could even make a case for such an Iraq War-based interpretation had the bombs targeted civilian neighborhoods or tube lines near where a majority were seen to favor the war, or where plenty of American expats live (eg Chelsea, Sloan Sq, Notting Hill, other West End fashionable areas).

But look at the tube lines that were targeted: Edgware Road?! Aldgate East?? Obviously, a major objective was to terrify secular muslim Britons who might not be with the Caliphate jihadist agenda.

Thus is the circle closed between Iraq and London (though not in ways that the Bush-haters would wish): the fascist death cult in Iraq targets democratic Iraqi muslims, the fascist death cult in London targets democratic UK muslims. The aim of fascism is to slaughter wherever possible those who love democracy– not only but especially fellow muslims.

Protest against Iraq War? Bullshit. It would be nice if Americans could, for once, remember that the world does not revolve around the USA or its president.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:13 pm 166. Katherine:

Rod.

Very interesting insight. I still think that strategically Iraq was an obvious military choice because it places our forces right smack in the middle of the ME. Politically, it was an obvious choice, too: Saddam was in violation of the cease-fire pretty much 10 days from the signing the thereof; he kept firing on our planes and was in violation of multiple UN binding resolutions (if you care for such things). In the ideal world perhaps it would have been better to go after SA or Syria first, but we do not live in an ideal world.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:18 pm 167. Steven Mitchell:

Paul, “… While there was some disagreement about the wisdom of entering WW2 it’s hard to imagine at that time American citizens demonstrating in the streets carrying the enemy’s flags, calling for the impeachment of the President, and the defeat of America.”

My point is that it doesn’t take nearly as much agreement to get the job done as people think. WWII is a good example of that point, and not intended as a parallel in other ways. And yes, I agree that American citizens would be better behaved in those circumstances. But it’s not because they would be supportive. It’s because said demonstrators are mostly cowards that wouldn’t dream of demonstrating if there was any actual risk. (There are always a few such true believers and a few more with martyr complexes.)

The will we have now is about as much as we are going to get. It better be sufficient. I think it is, if certain people get out of the way. As I implied in my last post, conservatives and liberals are both necessary in this effort. They are also sufficient. Leftist do not have anything positive to contribute except silence.

The other thing that a catastrophic attack would contribute is speed of the counterattack. But the main reason that we need speed right now is to get the job done before such an attack. So I see that as a wash.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:27 pm 168. jerry:

nygoblue:

Give me some credit. I immediately IDed you as a Michigan Graduate. I have several degrees from Illinois so it stood out like a sore thumb.

Now, down to business. I don’t think you are troll, but I do detect a lack of understanding on the nature of War, any war. Here is a little sample of why your conclusion that the flypaper theory is faulty:

Case 1: The German Ardennes Offensive took place in December 1944 when it appeared the Germans were on the ropes. It is the Tet offensive of the European Theater. The German’s caught us napping and as result they inflicted 80,000 US casualties. Using your logic, the Allied Campaign Strategy was a failure because the Germans were able to mass their strength and launch an offensive and inflict huge casualties on US forces. Yet the German Commanders understood that the offensive was doomed to failure within the first 24 hours. The German’s could inflict damage but they could not win.

Case 2: The Battle of the Atlantic. This is actually a better example for the GWOT. The Allies defeated the German U-boat offensive in April and May of 1943. However, this did not mean that there were zero sinkings by U-boats for the remainder of the War. In fact, the last sinking of a merchant vessel by a U-boat occurred in the last week of the war. Again, by your logic the allied sea control campaign was a failure because the German’s could still sink ships all the way to the end of the war.

Case 3: The Okinawa Campaign. Japanese suicide aircraft inflict 1/3 of all the US Navy’s losses in 60 days. Somehow we managed to defeat the Japanese despite these losses. Japanese suicide pilots inflict lossed until the end of the campaign. By your logic Fleet Air Defense was failure because US losses were far greater then Pearl Harbor and Savo Island combined.

Bottom line, in war there are casualties and the occur at the beginning, middle and end of the war. War is about attrition and both sides will take losses proportional to their ability to dish out punishment. Traditionally, relative losses are represented by the set of Lancaster Equations, which are simple difference or differential equations that contain information about the relative firepower of each side.

The fact is that the US and its few reliable allies, i.e., Australia and the United Kingdom have inflicted far more damage on Al Qaeda then they have on us. You are a victim of the Tet syndrome. According to the Tet mentality If the enemy can launch any attack then you are losing. By the Tet criteria, Germany must have won the Second World War because they were able to launch a surprise attack and inflict huge losses on US Forces. But of course the press did not side with Germany as they did with North Vietnam in 1968 and be willing to spin a disaster for the enemy into a US defeat.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:31 pm 169. rod:

katherine,

well said, I agree.

at any rate, discussions about terror and terror financing–stuff that gets me up in the morning–are pointless today.

its about the dead and the wounded. I’ll pray for them all.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:33 pm 170. c:

It would be nice if Americans could, for once, remember that the world does not revolve around the USA or its president.

Hey, Thibaud, didn’t you mean to say, “it would be nice if the world could, for once, remember that the USA or its President don’t revolve around the world”? Americans may be a tad self-absorbed, but the rest of the world needs to get over blaming us for every ill on earth, demanding that we cure these ills, and then heavily criticize us for how we apply our tonics.

I would agree that the bombs were very much intended to intimidate local Muslims into more correct submission, as well as galvanize the blame-our-side lefty types to increase political pressure against our WoT efforts. The terrorists can’t actually be stupid enough to think they can scare the Brits into surrender, can they be?

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:36 pm 171. Katherine:

Charlotte, they thought they could do this to Americans (the weak horse), why would they assume Brits were any different? One infidel is as another infidel.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:42 pm 172. Katherine:

“they are attacking us because of something that we have done, then all we have to do is correct it by giving them what they want, and all will be well. Thus we control the situation because our actions are the root of the evil being done us.”

Neo-neocon, thank you for explaining the basic leftists pathology in very simple terms. Much is clearer now.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:55 pm 173. c:

Katherine, I think this attack was more about rending apart at the seams any tenuous political consensus over the WoT in GB, and putting local Muslims on notice that they are to support jihad. Actually, 9-11 didn’t have the desired effect on Anericans, did it? Osama and his gang woke us up only to have us chase the hell out of them and start messing more with the ME. Anyway, everybody knows that you can’t scare a Brit , but you can sure set off the Euro leftists into endless recriminations against Bush and Blair.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:57 pm 174. c:

BTW, “Anericans” are Yanks who type in the dark.

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:58 pm 175. thibaud:

The location of these bombs makes it pretty clear that the targets were primarily muslims, not the Blair government. It’s as if a group of IRA operatives in Boston set off bombs in the heavily Irish working class neighborhoods of Dorchester and Southie. Or a group of muslim-americans set off bombs in west Detroit and Jersey City neighborhoods.

Again, to be clear, Edgware Road = muslim-land, ground zero for UK and European muslims, as it were. If you want arabic reading materials in Europe, go to Edgware Road. If you want to organize a demonstration or open an islamic bank or recruit muslim agents, go to Edgware Road.

It seems unbelievable to me that this crucial fact of the story is ignored. I can only chalk it up to extreme parochialism (in the US) and a mix of shock and PC (in the UK).

Jul 7, 2005 - 8:59 pm 176. flenser:

Bush is in power until 2009, come what may. But in the British system, Blair and Labor can be replaced at any time, under the right circumstances.

Al Queda know this, and may have decided to attempt to destabilise the British government. If so, a steady series of small attacks would seem to be the better tactic, from their point. A single massive attack would be more likely to rally the people around Blair.

This is giving them perhaps more credit than they are due. It may be that this was the best they could manage, in which case they are in bad shape. But if they have decided that Britain is the weak link in the coalition, then I’d expect this to be the first in a series of attacks.

It seems like a very high risk move on their part, since it could just as easily blow up in their faces and cause Europe in general to crack down hard on them. They must be feeling rather desperate to be willing to take that risk.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:03 pm 177. c:

Thibaud,

Why not both the local Muslims and Blair government? The locations involved could also be a matter of ‘bomb what you know’ and where you can fit in without raising suspicion. Also, there are other ways to terrorize Muslim enclaves that would bring less heat on the perps.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:09 pm 178. Paul:

Stephen M.:

I don’t wish to belabor this anymore so I will end by simply suggesting that the flaw in your argument, imo, is that you have failed to adequately assess the fallout (no pun intended) from a nuclear attack. It will absolutely bring us to our knees. The delicately interwoven fabric of the complexities of modern civilization will unravel in ways that the world has never witnessed. It will be far worse than what befell the Japanese because the world is much more interconnected technologically, and there won’t be a superpower to help us rebuild. Beyond the horrific human toll,it will shatter our economy. Trade will stop. The ports and borders will be under quarantine. There will be panic amongst the citizens in every city that feels it may be a target, and on and on.

There is no precedent, and it will elicit unprecedented responses from the American people.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:15 pm 179. Rick Ballard:

c,

If you fit the probable profile of those who placed the bombs, would you rather do so in:

a) An area in which your appearance would not draw any attention.

or

b) An area where you would stick out like a sore thumb.

I think you may have outthunk yourself Thibaud. Occam’s Razor dictates a more likely explanation. It’s not as if “moderate” Muslims were demonstrating against jihadi whackos every day in London. Unfortunately.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:18 pm 180. Katherine:

Agreed, Charlotte, but these assholes watch Hollywood movies, CNN and Dick Durbin, and they actually believe that what they see is the real America. That is why it is so criminally irresponsible for our politicians to undermine out security goals: every time the jihadis smell our weakness, they will try to attack. And I donít give a damn if we kill them all in retaliation: I just donít to get there, period.

For our sake. And theirs.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:19 pm 181. Katherine:

The ìthey will nuke us, and we will nuke them backî theme is more than I can bear at the moment, so I am going away to suck dry my California Cab bottle and contemplate on the container ships as they enter the Bay: which one, if any, carries the dirty bomb.

Before I retire, thank you Roger and all you guys. On a day like this I would go insane without you.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:31 pm 182. klrfz1:

I just don’t see how Al Queda can win and establish their 13th century caliphate. If every western government surrendered to them tomorrow, could the jihadis actually rule us? They’d have to come out of their caves and sleeper cells to give their commands, giving up their greatest weapon: hiding. Would the U.S. Marines take jihadi orders just because their commander in chief surrenders? Are there really enough jihadis to make us accept being their slaves? I bet there are lots of people who would be willing to walk down the block to shoot at a group of jihadis who were stoning a woman to death because she was raped by one of them. I believe even some of the anti-war moore-ons would rebel against the caliphate once they found out what they were in for. There would be 100 million jihadi rulers, then 50 million and then the survivors would run to hide in their caves again.

In addition, the jihad is primarily a battle against modernity. Even the jihadi rulers would have to give up all the wonders of the modern world. Is that what’s happening now in Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia? I don’t think so.

So my point is that whether the west ends up attacking jihadis, appeasing them, or just flat out surrendering won’t make any difference to the ultimate outcome of the jihad. The jihad will fail. The difference will be in how many people are killed during the jihad. Right?

A lot fewer Americans will die if the jihadis are prevented from acquiring a nuclear device. I wish I could send the Marines into Iran tomorrow.

I hope this isn’t just some more of that damned post ad hoc ergo magneto sum reasoning.

Jul 7, 2005 - 9:54 pm 183. thibaud:

Rick, c -

The locations involved could also be a matter of ‘bomb what you know’ and where you can fit in without raising suspicion.

An area where you would stick out like a sore thumb

I can tell you two have never been anywhere near a trading floor in the City of London. Or at Citibank’s offices on the Strand, or Merrill’s offices or any other investment bank where a majority of the traders are Pakistani or Indian. (At Citi the joke was that the trading floor looked like downtown Peshawar).

For a jihadist to “fit in” anywhere in the city of London, all he has to do is don some pinstripes and lose the beard.

As to Occam’s Razor, I believe the controversy within the muslim ranks, and the jihadists’ fanatical support for “Captain Hook” Hamza, provides a fairly simple explanation.

Look, if this were about the Iraq War, then there a hundred more logical targets across Britain – bases, government offices, pubs where soldiers hang out (remember the Birmingham pub bombing and other IRA bombings in the 1970s?)… hell, if it has to be on commuter transport, then at least target the hoity-toity neighborhoods where the Yanks and the toffs live, like Hollland Park or Notting Hill (Central Line) or else the West End.

But Edgware Road?!?! Again, it’s like jihadists bombing Jersey City tobacconists instead of the WTC. Makes no sense if the goal is to protest the Blair government’s decisions.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:04 pm 184. Rick Ballard:

Thibaud,

You may be right. You might consider that the bombs were time devices and that those who planted them probably did not set the timers on the Underground. Unattended packages draw attention in a very short time on the Underground, so a reasonable supposition would be that the person planting the device would have left the train a maximum of two stops before the place of detonation. That would leave them within a ten minute walk of the blast – and probably less of a walk from their safe house. Do you believe that the safe houses would be far from the Muslim centers? Would a bomber strand himself accross town knowing that the subways and buses would shut down?

Let’s see where they nab the bombers. If they went ground in the Arab section near the bomb blasts the answer will be self-evident.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:34 pm 185. Ron Wrght:

Katherine,

While you’re sitting on the dock of the bay watching the ships roll in (Otis Redding), I would be more concerned about containers coming from the interior with a dirty bomb that we are not screening.

Simple just run one into the dock blow up a dirty bomb put the Port of Long Beach out of operation for at least 90 days.

Bottom line $34B hit to the US economy.

Rick

I thinks it’s more of slinking out of your rat hole to the tube. The closer the better.

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:47 pm 186. thibaud:

Good points. But this is about where my ratiocination ends … Perhaps it’s the (northern) Irish in me but I simply don’t see the logic in slaughtering a very visibly, predictably multicultural group of anonymous commuters as a way of protesting the Blair government’s decisions. What does this achieve other than to screw up the Edgware Road community’s ability to get to work?

The IRA, thuggish as they are, at least has some strategic coherence, an alignment between a defined political objective and the tactical means of achieving it. For ex., even the Birnmingham pub atrocity was justified as a hit on a “military target” ie a soldiers’ hangout. Dumb, but at least there’s an attempt at logic.

With the jihadists, the only logic I can see is that they meant to send a message to Londoners re Hamza. Had it been about Iraq, then a different place and time surely would have made far more sense. Then again, this appears to be the logic of “Viva El Muerte!”

Jul 7, 2005 - 10:48 pm 187. mika.:

I think as long as these taliban and al queda types are enjoying the sun in places like gitmo and there’s lack the will to quickly execute them, this war will not be won. But there’s always hope that such will change:

.

.

http://www.simaqianstudio.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t1875.html

Jul 8, 2005 - 5:02 am 188. mika.:

“lack of will”

Jul 8, 2005 - 5:05 am 189. Bostonian:

The blog It Comes In Pints has a rather wonderful tribute to Britain:

http://www.secondbreakfast.net/archives/001995.html

I highly recommend it.

Jul 8, 2005 - 5:42 am 190. c:

these assholes watch Hollywood movies, CNN and Dick Durbin, and they actually believe that what they see is the real America.

Katherine, I think you’re right- our jihad enemies do seem to process reality a bit like grade-schoolers who can’t distinguish the true America from our cinematic fiction and skewed news, and who can’t value the advantages of modernity over medievalism, even though many of them have lived here in the West. It’s as if they’re living a computer game as players with jambiyas and maces trying to topple a satanic kingdom to re-establish a glorious Caliphate on earth. All high drama, impossible odds, and tribal fealty.

But then our side has pols, pundits and celebrities who are also out of touch with reality and allowing political style and party belonging to trump common sense. They treat the WoT as if it were a movie to critique, a video with rewind options, or a TV ballgame for which we get to blithely choose sides. Real flesh and blood and lives were torn apart yesterday in London. Lives and liberty are bloodied everywhere the Islamists hide or openly hold ground. Would that our fantasists realize this and stop giving even rhetorical aid to the enemy of enlightened civilization.

Islamists may not be able to rule us with superior strength or ideology directly, but they are succeeding in deepening the dangerous faultlines that already exist within western society between the passivists/pacifists/and PC sympathists, and its defenders… between those who indulge in wishful thinking and don’t believe there’ll be real-life consequences for their posturing or disengagement and the realists who know that this is a real fight to the finish. Maybe it’s a matter of suspension of disbelief in the theater versus the eye-blinking harsh sunlight outside, and some people won’t budge from their cushy seats and darkened room after the show. We need to bring back ushers!

Jul 8, 2005 - 7:10 am 191. PeterUK:

The tube bombing follows the route of the Circle Line,it is easy to get on and off anywhere round central London.The other bombings follow the route of the Piccadilly Line,which has an extension out to Heathrow.Russell Square and Tavistock Square are only a short walk from Euston and Kings Cross St Pancras,it may be that the bomber was not going to the tube stations by bus but leaving one.

Rather than enumerate the many intersections here is a map of the Tube,http://www.multimap.com/map/tube.cgi?client=public&tsize=500&tmap=to

It is obvious that a bomb with a timer could have been placed on the trains by anyone travelling on other intersecting routes.

It is easy enough to hop from one line to another,get on and off trains before they leave stations and be going in the other direction in minutes.

The site of the detonation,may not be,therefore,significant.

Jul 8, 2005 - 10:14 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: