NationStates Jolt Archive

Out of respect for the mourning and expressions of sympathy on the other London thread and in recognition of the need that some posters have to dicuss who's to blame and what should be done I'm starting this thread. Let's bring the divisive political discussions here and leave the other thread to those who seek to grieve.

Thank you.

Lots of people arguing, lets get it out here!

BBC and prime minister say it was al qaieda (SP?)

here's the thing claiming resposibility as al Qaeda, if anyone speaks arabic.(I assume it's arabic)

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,490370,00.jpg

could people please not vote for the "comedy" option. people died in these attacks.

It was the French. Did you see Chirac's face when he stood behind Blair in the G8 statement from Gleneagles? I swear he was whistling and shifting his eyes. Man! They really didn't like Paris losing to London...

(well, think about it before you hit me)

I'll wait to see who profits before I decide whether it's the government or rag heads.

That's pretty lame, trying to make light of actual deaths and injuries. Pretty Goddamned lame.

Go do something worthwhile.

could people please not vote for the "comedy" option. people died in these attacks.

Its a Natural Defense Mechanism to difuse difficult situations with humor. I do like the other guys post about France, It is actually an option that always gets dismissed, but they do have a long standing fued with the English...

I am not religious, but I think most of you would join me in a prayer for the families of those lost or injured...

Requiem Intera Pax

could people please not vote for the "comedy" option. people died in these attacks.
I apologize if the comedy option offends you. Everyone deals with things there own way. I didn't intend to downplay the seriousness of the attacks, I just can't walk around forever with my head down crying. I can't live that way. My heart goes out to all who died or lost loved one.

You could have at least thrown in another option that would make sense. Like the IRA for instance.

Can't the yucks wait for a day?

Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.

I do like the other guys post about France, It is actually an option that always gets dismissed, but they do have a long standing fued with the English...

Well it has been nearly two centuries since we've had a full out war with them.

So?

Humour is a great healer imo.

When people are ready to use humour in things it is a sign rational debate can be possible, as the emotions generated by such atrocities no longer override reason.
yeah well this is a forum where everyone can see you. It's like joking about someones death at the wake. If you really have to joke to yourself or to your friends NOT where victims/relations of victims can see it especially not on the day it's happend!

This is all Blair´s fault, if it wasent for the war in Irak it wood have never happend. End the war in Irak Now!!! and get Blar and co out of our Laberparty!!!

How come everyone who blaims the war on Iraq spells it "irak"??

That's pretty lame, trying to make light of actual deaths and injuries. Pretty Goddamned lame.

Go do something worthwhile.
I take it this is directed to me (or mayhaps to the thread starter). I have no doubt you know exactly how many friends and family members I have in London at the moment. I'm relieved You can relieve yourself by stating how horrible me/others joking about the bombings is. My way of relieving my anxiety is joking about it. Let's try and allow both.

It was a group, not sure what exactly who they are, but they say they were doing it in the name of Al-Qaeda(sp?)

I liked how the IRA was fucking fast on saying it was not them lol.

Can't the yucks wait for a day?

Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.

It may be unbelievable to you, but it is a strong British tradition to use comedy to offset tragedy. The show must go on, don't you know. Regardless of terrorist bombs, or the horrors of the Blitz. We can not let those that would commit violence win by making us change our behaviour. Yes we mourn those who lost their lives, our deepest condolences go out to their families and loved ones, but life must continue.

This is all Blair´s fault, if it wasent for the war in Irak it wood have never happend. End the war in Irak Now!!! and get Blar and co out of our Laberparty!!!

Wow. Thanks for giving the pro-Blair crowd your post. It proves beyond a doubt that those against him are poorly schooled. :p

yeah well this is a forum where everyone can see you. It's like joking about someones death at the wake. If you really have to joke to yourself or to your friends NOT where victims/relations of victims can see it especially not on the day it's happend!

True.

It is respectful.

(NB: I haven't made any jokes about this, just the comedy options didn't offend me in the least)

How come everyone who blaims the war on Iraq spells it "irak"??
[Best Redneck Imitation] Because we is Amarikins dam it! [/Redneck] :p
Seriously, I do think it's Iraq. I also think the UN is gonna seriously reconsider their position in WWIII...

This is all Blair´s fault, if it wasent for the war in Irak it wood have never happend. End the war in Irak Now!!! and get Blar and co out of our Laberparty!!!
this is precisely the nonsense that George Galloway spouted on the radio just now. the threat of terrorist attacks have been present in the UK since 2001 and before; certainly before the war in Iraq. anybody remember when they stationed 50 tanks and 2000 troops at Heathrow airport back in '02 as a result of terrorist threat?

man i hate Galloway. just saying the things he knows people want to hear, the things that will get him popularity; constantly changing his stance on everything with almost no credibility or consistancy in policy. nor does he offer any alternatives: only criticism :rolleyes:

It was a group, not sure what exactly who they are, but they say they were doing it in the name of Al-Qaeda(sp?)

I liked how the IRA was fucking fast on saying it was not them lol.
Of course they where! They don't want the peace process to break down.(although this is the first I heard of them denying it)

[Best Redneck Imitation] Because we is Amarikins dam it! [/Redneck] :p
Seriously, I do think it's Iraq. I also think the UN is gonna seriously reconsider their position in WWIII...
Doesn't matter if America and Britan leave Iraq now, they'll just follow. Cause they'll know it works. We've dug a deep grave here.


Maybe it was a country pissed at not getting the Olympics?

You could have at least thrown in another option that would make sense. Like the IRA for instance.

The IRA? No chance, I knew from the start it wouldn't have been, they have the 'decency' to tell people an attack's coming.

And since when did the IRA make co-ordinated bomb attacks?

Oh, and has anyone heard whether the suspect package that was found on a bus in Coventry Bus Station (Pool Meadow) was a bomb or not? I'd like to know whether someone was attempting to bomb my city up as well...

You sick bastards! Shame on you all.

In my opinion that letter is forged (it was done on a mac for one) and i highly doubt Al Qeida for these attacks. They are some of the best in their business and judging by the debris those things were home made. I am guessing that they were relatively small explosives placed near the fuel tanks of the busses, making lots of heat and fire but not a great deal of raw explosive force. This would explain why the transports were shredded and aside from shapnel there was minimal colateral damage.

However, shrapnel in a crowded area is not a good thing and truly the definition of an indiscriminate attack. News reports say that the explosions were 'near synchronised'. Any self respecting fringe group would have them all on one detonator, or would have synchronised timers.

I think it was either Al Qeida wannabes based in the city, and the claim from the 'european al quieda' supports that. If Al Qeida were in fact behind it, i predict the death toll to be between one and two thousand. In theory (using military-grade explosives) this attack (assuming all transports were at full capacity) would have killed/injured around 1600+ people. Smuggling a single slab of C4 onto a London bus would be a walk in the park, and so their only constraint was resources.

I must agree with you on that. A bunch of wannabes. Damn posers.

In my opinion that letter is forged (it was done on a mac for one) and i highly doubt Al Qeida for these attacks. They are some of the best in their business and judging by the debris those things were home made. I am guessing that they were relatively small explosives placed near the fuel tanks of the busses, making lots of heat and fire but not a great deal of raw explosive force. This would explain why the transports were shredded and aside from shapnel there was minimal colateral damage.

However, shrapnel in a crowded area is not a good thing and truly the definition of an indiscriminate attack. News reports say that the explosions were 'near synchronised'. Any self respecting fringe group would have them all on one detonator, or would have synchronised timers.

I think it was either Al Qeida wannabes based in the city, and the claim from the 'european al quieda' supports that. If Al Qeida were in fact behind it, i predict the death toll to be between one and two thousand. In theory (using military-grade explosives) this attack (assuming all transports were at full capacity) would have killed/injured around 1600+ people. Smuggling a single slab of C4 onto a London bus would be a walk in the park, and so their only constraint was resources.
1) They weren't big explosives, but they weren't tiny either. From the look of the bus they showed on TV there was no fire and no extensive burn damage. It looked like what a small backpack with a few KG of high explosive might do. Not a couple of pipe bombs near the fuel tank. ( I'm not an expert, but I've had some experience with little homemade explosives and have been present several times when dynamite was used for blasting granite prior to swimming pool construction. My opinion isn't definative, just an educated guess.)

2) Al Quaeda's best trained personell are mostly on the run or captured. Security is tighter worldwide since 9/11 and Madrid. This may be the best they could manage.

Out of Curiosity, why is it the 'New Scotland Yard'?

It wasn't the French. Here's why.

1. The bombs actually exploded at the right time, without any lenghty debate, strike, protest, or philosophical dissertation about the concept of "explosion".

2. The explosions didn't have enough panache. They were quite cliché. Too much réalisme moderne.

3. No beret was found at the scene.

4. Didn't sound like "ZE BOUM!".

5. No British restaurant was targeted.

Out of Curiosity, why is it the 'New Scotland Yard'?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Scotland_Yard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Scotland_Yard
thank you

Out of Curiosity, why is it the 'New Scotland Yard'?

Because it's Scotland Yard's second HQ. The original was retired.

http://www.met.police.uk/history/new_scotland_yard.htm

Damn! Sarkasis may be right! But Le French were behind it, though...

And since when did the IRA make co-ordinated bomb attacks?

Since the early 70s. They had a technique of letting off small bombs in order to cause destruction and minor casualties, and then later larger bombs timed to hit the emergency services. Bloody Friday (July 72) is a case of a string of bombs being detonated around Belfast one after another in order to paralyse the entire palce and cause maximum havoc. Another example of this is the Narrow Water bombing in 1979 - one bomb went off as an army convoy passed by (killing 6) and then a timed device went off 20 minutes later catching troops who had been helicoptered in to secure the area and tend to the injured (killing 12).

Some previously unknown muslim-extremist terrorist group has claimed responsability.

It wasn't the French. Here's why.

1. The bombs actually exploded at the right time, without any lenghty debate, strike, protest, or philosophical dissertation about the concept of "explosion".

2. The explosions didn't have enough panache. They were quite cliché. Too much réalisme moderne.

3. No beret was found at the scene.

4. Didn't sound like "ZE BOUM!".

5. No British restaurant was targeted.

And that, ladies and gentlement, is called comedy.

Damn! Sarkasis may be right! But Le French were behind it, though...

Riiiiiiight. How about a militant branch of Plaid Cymru?

If all else fails, y'all can always blame Canada.

Riiiiiiight. How about a militant branch of Plaid Cymru?
Nopes. It's le French.
They lost the Olympics, and they don't fancy the food. Elementary, dear Markreich.

Since the early 70s. They had a technique of letting off small in order to cause destruction and minor casualties, and then later larger timed to hit the emergency services. An example of this is the Narrow Water ing in 1979 - one went off as an army convoy passed by (killing 6) and then a timed device went off 20 minutes later catching troops who had been helicoptered in to secure the area and tend to the injured (killing 12).

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) english and 2) against the freedom fighters known as the Irish Republican Army. Face it, during the Troubles, you brits got what you deserved at the hands of the Irish Defenders. However, I DO NOT support the attack which occured today because it was 1) done by rag-heads, not the Irish and 2) was directed completly at civilans, not at loyalist paramilitaries or the english government, so I sympethize with those who died today, but not with those who died in the Troubles.

And that, ladies and gentlement, is called comedy.
Thanks.




On a more serious note, the London blasts look similar to the Madrid blasts, but with less powerful explosives (or smaller amounts). Probably a sibling group to the Madrid terrorists. Backpack or suitcase bombs, we'll have the answers soon, I guess.



PS: Since France and Monty Pythons are among the choices in this poll, I expect to find comedy in the thread...

Since the early 70s. They had a technique of letting off small bombs in order to cause destruction and minor casualties, and then later larger bombs timed to hit the emergency services. Bloody Friday (July 72) is a case of a string of bombs being detonated around Belfast one after another in order to paralyse the entire palce and cause maximum havoc. Another example of this is the Narrow Water bombing in 1979 - one bomb went off as an army convoy passed by (killing 6) and then a timed device went off 20 minutes later catching troops who had been helicoptered in to secure the area and tend to the injured (killing 12).

Ah, thanks...not in my lifetime, but I consider myself educaed.

Islamic French devil worshippers who hate government and love Monty Python.

What about the IRA?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) english and 2) against the freedom fighters known as the Irish Republican Army. Face it, during the Troubles, you brits got what you deserved at the hands of the Irish Defenders. However, I DO NOT support the attack which occured today because it was 1) done by rag-heads, not the Irish and 2) was directed completly at civilans, not at loyalist paramilitaries or the english government, so I sympethize with those who died today, but not with those who died in the Troubles.

Thank you, my father served defending those who apparently deserved what they got.

The majority of Northern Irish people want to stay with the UK, due to religious reasons and others, yet the IRA don't like it. I can't be bothered to start with an idiot like you today, really can't.

1) They weren't big explosives, but they weren't tiny either. From the look of the bus they showed on TV there was no fire and no extensive burn damage. It looked like what a small backpack with a few KG of high explosive might do. Not a couple of pipe bombs near the fuel tank. ( I'm not an expert, but I've had some experience with little homemade explosives and have been present several times when dynamite was used for blasting granite prior to swimming pool construction. My opinion isn't definative, just an educated guess.)

2) Al Quaeda's best trained personell are mostly on the run or captured. Security is tighter worldwide since 9/11 and Madrid. This may be the best they could manage.

True, but HE is not something you come across unless you are actively looking for it for a long time with a full wallet. The fuel tank would act as a container for the explosion, limiting the incidentary damage greatly.

Also, whether it was quality stuff or well-placed crap, shredding a bus like that with an explosive gets the fuel tank involved no-matter what, so my above explanation would apply to a few KG of HE as well.

However, one bus had the top deck fully removed by the blast but most of the people on the lower deck were not severely injured. This suggests that the blast was on the top deck, and so far from the fuel tank i doubt that it even ruptured. This supports your idea of HE, and so i am unsure.

Smuggling such materials into the UK would be a pain in the ass, as our airport security is pretty tight and going by boat would involve getting it through at least one country. The same goes for the Channel Tunnel, unless it came from France.

More likely it was manufactured legitimately and then stolen or concocted in someones garage. Someone, that is, with the time, money and know-how. I could have a high-grade napalm bomb by the end of the week, but HE takes skill and caution. One wrong move with that stuff and you've not only save the authorities the trouble of locating a bomb-maker, but you've probably been kind enough to transport a chunk or two to the nearest police station.

I would like the government to take a more 'zero-tollerance' stand on things like this, in a similar way to Russian counter-terrorist forces. Their ingenious tactic is to identify the terrorist, round up their family and threated to kill them all in brutal ways unless the terrorist stands down.

I use the word terrorist for lack of a better word, when in fact a terrorist is simply someone who uses terror or fear tactics in their situation. Every-day threats are an example of this at a basic level.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) english and 2) against the freedom fighters known as the Irish Republican Army. Face it, during the Troubles, you brits got what you deserved at the hands of the Irish Defenders. However, I DO NOT support the attack which occured today because it was 1) done by rag-heads, not the Irish and 2) was directed completly at civilans, not at loyalist paramilitaries or the english government, so I sympethize with those who died today, but not with those who died in the Troubles.
1. BWO is northern irish. 2. The IRA has not been freedom fighters since before the republic of Ireland was declared(if ever), at the moment I would call them criminals more then terrorists but they where terrorists(hopefully they won't ever do terrorist actions again).
3. I am assuming you're American-Irish? I rather you didn't mix terrorists with people who geniunely fought for Irish freedom.

(I am Irish, lived here all my life and a catholic and am with the majority of Irish people with the above opinions.)

The Germans did it! They want revenge! Its world war 3!!!!

But seriously, I think Al-Qeida (sp?) or some other ragtag terrorist network did it.

The Germans did it! They want revenge! Its world war 3!!!!

But seriously, I think Al-Qeida (sp?) or some other ragtag terrorist network did it.
"You are watching AQ1... we know terrorism."
(Sorry, something about word "network" brought that to my mind. I watch too much TV!)

Can I just point out a few things:

1. Al Quieda does not exsist. It is a term invented by the American Supreme Court a few years ago, which was adopted by the Bush Administration to give a face to the enemy. People claim to be Al Quieda because it becomes instant World Wide publicity, as Al Quieda is a brand like Coca Cola, something the majority of the world can relate to and have feelings about.

2. Can people stop joking about the French doing it or other "Comedy" answers, as if you had not notice 37 ordinary people like you and me died today. They got up, like you and me, went to work, like you and me, and are now dead.

Finally I would like to say my condolenses are with all those affected by this incident.

True, but HE is not something you come across unless you are actively looking for it for a long time with a full wallet. The fuel tank would act as a container for the explosion, limiting the incidentary damage greatly.

Also, whether it was quality stuff or well-placed crap, shredding a bus like that with an explosive gets the fuel tank involved no-matter what, so my above explanation would apply to a few KG of HE as well.

However, one bus had the top deck fully removed by the blast but most of the people on the lower deck were not severely injured. This suggests that the blast was on the top deck, and so far from the fuel tank i doubt that it even ruptured. This supports your idea of HE, and so i am unsure.

Smuggling such materials into the UK would be a pain in the ass, as our airport security is pretty tight and going by boat would involve getting it through at least one country. The same goes for the Channel Tunnel, unless it came from France.

More likely it was manufactured legitimately and then stolen or concocted in someones garage. Someone, that is, with the time, money and know-how. I could have a high-grade napalm bomb by the end of the week, but HE takes skill and caution. One wrong move with that stuff and you've not only save the authorities the trouble of locating a bomb-maker, but you've probably been kind enough to transport a chunk or two to the nearest police station.

I would like the government to take a more 'zero-tollerance' stand on things like this, in a similar way to Russian counter-terrorist forces. Their ingenious tactic is to identify the terrorist, round up their family and threated to kill them all in brutal ways unless the terrorist stands down.

I use the word terrorist for lack of a better word, when in fact a terrorist is simply someone who uses terror or fear tactics in their situation. Every-day threats are an example of this at a basic level.
HE isn't all that hard. You can make the explosive for the primers from concentrated H2O2 (available as a swimming pool shock), citric acid (available to anyone who cans fruits and vegetables. Used to prevent botulism bacteria from forming), and hexamine fuel tablets for those little camp stoves.

The explosive itself can be made from Potassium Chlorate taken from matches mixed with parrafin wax and petrolatum into a paste. There are numerous other recipies as well that can be made in one's kitchen.

Taking common sense precautions will prevent one from losing his hands or worse.

BTW, anyone trying to produce what I've described, I didn't include the proportions of each chemical or the method by which they should be mixed or the chemicals that will make them explode spontaneously, so you'll probably blow yourself up. Especially with the primer mix.

The war on Iraq didn't bomb London. Hateful terrorists did! Why does everyone treat them as friends? Can you not see that the terrorists are BAD people? I am not saying , however, that ALL muslims and middle-eastern people are bad. Many of them are inncoent. But its high time we struck down on AL-Quaida and other terrorist organizations and stop the madness. If we let them go free, onyl mroe havoc will ensue. They will not show us mercy, so why should we show them any?

The war on Iraq didn't bomb London. Hateful terrorists did! Why does everyone treat them as friends? Can you not see that the terrorists are BAD people? I am not saying , however, that ALL muslims and middle-eastern people are bad. Many of them are inncoent. But its high time we struck down on AL-Quaida and other terrorist organizations and stop the madness. If we let them go free, onyl mroe havoc will ensue. They will not show us mercy, so why should we show them any?
OK. Please tell us WHERE we can actually find some kind of a "Al Quaeda central target", and I'm sure somebody will send a few cruise missiles right on target (or slightly to the side).

could people please not vote for the "comedy" option. people died in these attacks.
Some people deal with greif through humor. That's just the way people think. I hope a line of people are telling jokes & funny stories about me when I kick. It will mean they really knew me.

I think the Daily Mail did it to start a mass vigilante uprising against every single non-white person in the country.

I think the Daily Mail did it to start a mass vigilante uprising against every single non-white person in the country.
Why would this start an uprising against blacks?

Al Qaeda. Plain and simple.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) english and 2) against the freedom fighters known as the Irish Republican Army. Face it, during the Troubles, you brits got what you deserved at the hands of the Irish Defenders. However, I DO NOT support the attack which occured today because it was 1) done by rag-heads, not the Irish and 2) was directed completly at civilans, not at loyalist paramilitaries or the english government, so I sympethize with those who died today, but not with those who died in the Troubles.

I'm going to out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) Irish or sympathetic to the Irish cause and 2) ignorant of history, because if you knew history you would know that the IRA has planted bombs to take out civilians before.

Don't believe me?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/17/newsid_2538000/2538147.stm

Here's a brief overview for you. A carbomb exploded outside of Harrod's, a very popular shopping complex, at the height of christmas shopping killing six people. I fail to see how a shopping complex can be considered a place for loyalist paramilatries or the english government. I have yet to see the house of commons or lords metting outside a shopping mall.n This was an atttack that directly targetted civilians!

Therefore your argument that it could not be the IRa because the IRA does not target civilians is complete BULL FUCKING SHIT!


This is not the first time the IRA has targetted civilians and I doubt it will be the last time. Get your facts straight next time before you shoot your mouth off.


Some more instances
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/25/newsid_2519000/2519673.stm
They were planning on bombing resorts for civilians in the middle of summer vacation season.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/20/newsid_2515000/2515667.stm
Blowing up the civilian stock exchange

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/20/newsid_2544000/2544121.stm

Anotehr shopping centre attack when a small boy was killed

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/april/24/newsid_2523000/2523345.stm

bombed london buisness areas

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/18/newsid_4165000/4165719.stm
A relevent link to today. A bus was blown up without warning in downtown london.

2. Can people stop joking about the French doing it or other "Comedy" answers, as if you had not notice 37 ordinary people like you and me died today. They got up, like you and me, went to work, like you and me, and are now dead.

I don't believe anyone here has joked to mock the dead or wounded - or to cause harm to the families...it is a legitimate way to express ones self.

Remember - the Queen Mum joked during the blitz...and, in everyday examples - you'll often find ambulance medics, firefighters and police officers joking at the most gruesome accident scenes (of which I have some personal experience).

W.

you forgot to put the IRA in your poll

Giving further thought, i think that it was Al Qeida wannabes using home-made HE. By no standards was that stuff military-grade, otherwise an attack like that would have shattered the city. Good-old-fashioned common sense was a big part in this, it was clever to attack public transport which puts the city on hold if not doing any significant damage (compared to recent incidents). I would have thought ideal targets to be bridges, carparks*, office blocks or the actual subway station.

*Bombing a carpark would absolutely fuck the economies, with insurance companies buggered and no-one willing to park properly. Roads would be jammed for days and traffic wardens would roam freely. Even without casualties from the blast a multistory with holes in it will come down somewhere.

If, just IF (read: i do not do this and never will) i was going to target civilians in a bombing then i would rig a car or two full of the stuff and park up by the main structural support of an office building. Or i would possibly attatch bags of random-timed HE under manholes, the explosions ripping up the streets and stopping everyone driving while the city was combed.

This is a very complex issue. To me, it seems likely that the bombings were a result of British troop presence in Iraq, as this doesn't seem like the work of the IRA and fundamentalists have other targets they'd much rather bomb than London train stations and buses. To me, however, that means that the British SHOULD NOT pull out of Iraq. Otherwise, it would be clear that terrorists could control Western governments simply by planting conventional weaponry. I shouldn't need to say why that would be a disaster.

you forgot to put the IRA in your poll
I know, sorry about that. I had the list in my head, set up the poll, and then just like that I had an empty slot, and couldn't , for the life of me, remember what went there. Thats where Monty Python came in.

The assessments I heard seemed more or less correct.

This falls clearly into the MO of Al-qeda cells. The origins of training for said cells may be surprising, it may be that some are getting tips or at least examples from terrorists in Russia, who've been using similar methods.

I heard early this morning that a previously unknown group claiming to be an Al-qeda cell claimed responsibility on a website and demanded that Italy and Norway remove troops from Iraq.

Jewish Extremists?

Jewish Extremists?
Jewish extremists would have bombed muslim targets, no? Kach doesn't have a beef with the British as far as I know.

If they where aiming to get britain out of Iraq this was a bad move. (Im pretty sure that) the majority of brits wanted the troops out of Iraq before this attack, but what they think now is a coin toss, will they now say keep the troops in as a show of defiance (as I think they will) or will they blame actions in Iraq for this and want the troops out?

If they where aiming to get britain out of Iraq this was a bad move. (Im pretty sure that) the majority of brits wanted the troops out of Iraq before this attack, but what they think now is a coin toss, will they now say keep the troops in as a show of defiance (as I think they will) or will they blame actions in Iraq for this and want the troops out?
Which is why I have to say I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually the United States' CIA that is responsible for the bombings...

If they where aiming to get britain out of Iraq this was a bad move. (Im pretty sure that) the majority of brits wanted the troops out of Iraq before this attack, but what they think now is a coin toss, will they now say keep the troops in as a show of defiance (as I think they will) or will they blame actions in Iraq for this and want the troops out?
The thought process (I think) was: It worked in Spain; it'll work in Britain. I doubt a reliable poll has already been taken about public feelings concerning troops after the bombing. I hope the British populace will resist such blatant maneuvering with the lives of their people.

If they where aiming to get britain out of Iraq this was a bad move. (Im pretty sure that) the majority of brits wanted the troops out of Iraq before this attack, but what they think now is a coin toss, will they now say keep the troops in as a show of defiance (as I think they will) or will they blame actions in Iraq for this and want the troops out?
If that's so then it shows that the British are tougher people than the Spanish. The Spanish didn't care that their actions would be seen as a weakness by their enemies.

Jewish extremists would have bombed muslim targets, no? Kach doesn't have a beef with the British as far as I know.
But Monty Python quite clearly has beef with the Brits, right?

Which is why I have to say I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually the United States' CIA that is responsible for the bombings...
That's disgusting. Do you really have such a low opinion of us? Do you really think America would condone killing British civilians in cold blood on the gamble that it might help solidify British commitment? There was no chance that the troops would pull out before the bombing; the government was too committed.

Why isn't "communists" an option?

The assessments I heard seemed more or less correct.

This falls clearly into the MO of Al-qeda cells. The origins of training for said cells may be surprising, it may be that some are getting tips or at least examples from terrorists in Russia, who've been using similar methods.

I heard early this morning that a previously unknown group claiming to be an Al-qeda cell claimed responsibility on a website and demanded that Italy and Norway remove troops from Iraq.

I believe it was Italy and Denmark, sir. They threatened similar actions against those two nations.

It was :mp5: France :mp5: because London got the 2012 Olympics!!!!! :rolleyes:

We all now how badly france wanted it..... :mad:

That's disgusting. Do you really have such a low opinion of us? Do you really think America would condone killing British civilians in cold blood on the gamble that it might help solidify British commitment? There was no chance that the troops would pull out before the bombing; the government was too committed.
To be open minded and not immediately assume that the people to blame are who the politicians tell us is disgusting. You're right. Absolutely disgusting. I apologize for not assuming that this is the result of Muslim extremism.

First, let me point something out. I'm not arguing that it was the CIA. I'm simply stating that if it was proven to be the CIA, it would not surprise me one bit.

Not that I believe any American would condone the cold-blooded killing of anyone, especially a great American ally, however, this is exactly the type of thing the CIA has been doing all throughout history...

Which is why I have to say I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually the United States' CIA that is responsible for the bombings...
Yeah, right. Muslim extremists aren't known to do such things. It had to be the eebil CIA.

I believe it was Italy and Denmark, sir. They threatened similar actions against those two nations.
Yeah, and Italy's particularly vulnerable. It's become the gateway for illegal immigration of arabs and north Africans into Europe.

I was against te war in Iraq, but now we are there we finish the job.
You think us Brits are going to suddenly quit now? No way, this will only encourage the British finishing what we started. We are all going to be behind Blair now. Whoever was responsible for the attacks will be brought to justice.

To be open minded and not immediately assume that the people to blame are who the politicians tell us is disgusting. You're right. Absolutely disgusting. I apologize for not assuming that this is the result of Muslim extremism.

First, let me point something out. I'm not arguing that it was the CIA. I'm simply stating that if it was proven to be the CIA, it would not surprise me one bit.

Not that I believe any American would condone the cold-blooded killing of anyone, especially a great American ally, however, this is exactly the type of thing the CIA has been doing all throughout history...

We're not assuming it was the result of Muslim extremisim. Muslim extremists claimed responsibility.

But Monty Python quite clearly has beef with the Brits, right?
No, they don't. That's why I didn't vote Monty Python in the poll.

Guys...listen to the discussions they're having on FOX...the most conservative American news program...

Just listen to the results that will likely come out of this...

Fact of the matter is, America sadly didn't care quite as much when this happened to Spain...but for this to happen to America's strongest ally in the war on terror means that America will definitely pay attention...just think about the results that are coming out of this...

We're not assuming it was the result of Muslim extremisim. Muslim extremists claimed responsibility.
Muslim extremists claim responsibility for everything bad that happens to their enemies because they understand how the American media works...and the war they're fighting isn't about gaining territory...it's about minds...

Monty Python isn't a plural.

To be open minded and not immediately assume that the people to blame are who the politicians tell us is disgusting. You're right. Absolutely disgusting. I apologize for not assuming that this is the result of Muslim extremism.
Notice how in the first post I went through other options, including the emphatically not-Muslim IRA. Logically, it only makes sense if it came from a Muslim extremist group. Again, the chances that Britain was going to pull out before the bombings were non-existant. So the CIA had no motivation for doing this. What was disgusting about your post was that you immediately lept at the United States as the perpetrator. Contrary to what seems to be an absurdly popular belief, the USA is not the great Satan. We don't think that all populations besides ours are expendable. We actually believe what we say about human rights and freedom. You may not think we're doing a good job at it, but that's a different issue.

First, let me point something out. I'm not arguing that it was the CIA. I'm simply stating that if it was proven to be the CIA, it would not surprise me one bit.
Semantics. Suggestion and implication accomplish the same thing.

Not that I believe any American would condone the cold-blooded killing of anyone, especially a great American ally, however, this is exactly the type of thing the CIA has been doing all throughout history...
Evidence?

here's the thing claiming resposibility as al Qaeda, if anyone speaks arabic.(I assume it's arabic)

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,490370,00.jpg
Hmm... Well I can read Arabic fine, but its way too small for me to read. As Arabic is very intricate. :(

Al Qaeda. Plain and simple.

You do know that means "The Base" when translated into English?

Monty Python isn't a plural.
You're not a plural!

Jewish extremists would have bombed muslim targets, no? Kach doesn't have a beef with the British as far as I know.
Though, interestingly enough, one of the four targets was Aldgate, home of one of the largest concerntrations of muslims in London; and another was Edgeware Rd, which is a cultural centre for Middle Eastern nationals, particularly Lebanese.

Not that I generally have much time for paranoid conspiracy theories. My guess, same as everyone else, is Al Qaeda.

Fact of the matter is, America sadly didn't care quite as much when this happened to Spain...but for this to happen to America's strongest ally in the war on terror means that America will definitely pay attention...just think about the results that are coming out of this...
That's actually not true. I don't know if you were in the States at the time, but the level of media coverage here is basically the same. And we cared a hell of a lot, thanks.

Muslim extremists claim responsibility for everything bad that happens to their enemies because they understand how the American media works...and the war they're fighting isn't about gaining territory...it's about minds...
Runs kind of counter to the "evil CIA" explanation, doesn't it?

...seriously?

I believe that it was Muslim extremists, although, you've got to admit that it is weird that this was not a suicide attack, like EVERY OTHER ATTACK we've seen by them...

But how can you honestly say there is ZERO possibility it is the American CIA that it is responsible?

I'm not implying that the CIA was afraid that Britain would pull out...but that's not the only political discussion going on...

And please, tell me what you think the CIA has been up to since it was founded...tell me what you know about the CIA...

Al Qaeda or one their splinter cells.

It was :mp5: France :mp5: because London got the 2012 Olympics!!!!! :rolleyes:

We all now how badly france wanted it..... :mad:
Dude you have no idea how out of place that is, and wrong. France doesn't care if they lost anyway, they are emotionless... more specifically Parisians.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) english and 2) against the freedom fighters known as the Irish Republican Army. Face it, during the Troubles, you brits got what you deserved at the hands of the Irish Defenders. However, I DO NOT support the attack which occured today because it was 1) done by rag-heads, not the Irish and 2) was directed completly at civilans, not at loyalist paramilitaries or the english government, so I sympethize with those who died today, but not with those who died in the Troubles.

When you say "those who died in the troubles" try and remember that the "brits" weren't just soldiers, but ordinary people who were blown up in bombings. They had about as much to do with the occupation of Ireland as the people in London do with the occupation of Iraq. If you think the british deserve what they got, then you're saying that innocent people, going about their everyday lives in cities miles away from Ireland, deserve to die for the choices made by politicians.

You're as Irish as Brad Pitt's accent in "Snatch".

I believe that it was Muslim extremists, although, you've got to admit that it is weird that this was not a suicide attack, like EVERY OTHER ATTACK we've seen by them...
Spain much? Thanks for the admission, though.

But how can you honestly say there is ZERO possibility it is the American CIA that it is responsible?
For all of the reasons I've stated previously and later in this post.

I'm not implying that the CIA was afraid that Britain would pull out...but that's not the only political discussion going on...
Then what advantage could they possibly hope to gain? And, by the way, no CIA director would obey or issue that order. It's against their oath and certain international norms they're bound too.

And please, tell me what you think the CIA has been up to since it was founded...tell me what you know about the CIA...
Sure, they've done a view bad things, particularly in South America. But terrorist bombings have never been part of the repetoire. I want to see documented evidence on this point. Give me your best anti-CIA website.

I believe it was Italy and Denmark, sir. They threatened similar actions against those two nations.

Ah, a thousand apologies to Norway. It was around 5am when I heard it, I was busy trying to stay awake long enough to turn off the TV. ;)

Hmm... Well I can read Arabic fine, but its way too small for me to read. As Arabic is very intricate. :(

Here's the various summaries:

"Rejoice, Islamic nation. Rejoice, Arab world. The time has come for vengeance against the Zionist crusader government of Britain in response to the massacres Britain committed in Iraq and Afghanistan," said the statement, as translated by The Associated Press in Cairo.

"The heroic mujahedeen carried out a blessed attack in London, and now Britain is burning with fear and terror, from north to south, east to west," the statement reads.

"Rejoice, community of Muslims," the letter states. "The heroic mujahedeens today conducted an attack in London," it continues. All of Great Britain is now shaken and shocked, "in the north, the south, west and east." "We've warned the British government and the British people time and again," the letter adds. "We've kept our promise and have carried out a blessed military operation."

"We continue to warn the governments of Denmark and Italy and all other crusader governments." We demand that all countries pull their troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq, states the letter, which has been signed by the "Secret Organization -- al Qaida in Europe."

I'd give you an anti-CIA website, but you'd claim bias, so instead, I'll provide a few obviously non-biased links at the bottom of this...

Honestly, I'm really confused as to why you can so easily say that it is IMPOSSIBLE for this to be the acts of the CIA...

Bush wasn't exactly happy that the G8 wouldn't be focusing on terrorism as much.
We're about to have a Supreme Court Justice nominated and debated on in the Senate.
American opinion of the war in Iraq has been relatively low as of late...
And this attack simply reiterates the picture that Bush always like to paint of Good vs Evil.

If it is indeed the Muslim extremists (which I believe it to be), then it works out well for the Bush Administration. If it really was the CIA, it's not surprising.


Links to CIA operations proving that the CIA likes to dick with politics...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_pigs_invasion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_PBSUCCESS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Just_Cause
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

This is just the beginning. With the growing muslim population in Europe and ease of entry into and travel within the EU, and the growing tensions between the indiginous Europeans and muslim immigrants, (this incident wont help matters), theres bound to be more. If European solidarity grows stronger from this act then that only means there will be more target countries for these oppurtunists to exploit. It would take a serious break in relations with the US to
minimize further cowardly acts by muslim groups, which I would consider cowing down. The western democracies must stick together, were in this together, like it or not. If your living in a western democracy then your are an infidel in their eyes and allah will smite you, etc,etc. Democratic muslims in these countries should take a stand against these criminals for their own sake, because people can be stupid when responding to attack. But god love the Brits for their attitude in the face of this.

DOWN WITH THE COWARDLY PIG-DOG TERRORISTS!

In my opinion that letter is forged (it was done on a mac for one) and i highly doubt Al Qeida for these attacks. They are some of the best in their business and judging by the debris those things were home made. I am guessing that they were relatively small explosives placed near the fuel tanks of the busses, making lots of heat and fire but not a great deal of raw explosive force. This would explain why the transports were shredded and aside from shapnel there was minimal colateral damage.

However, shrapnel in a crowded area is not a good thing and truly the definition of an indiscriminate attack. News reports say that the explosions were 'near synchronised'. Any self respecting fringe group would have them all on one detonator, or would have synchronised timers.

I think it was either Al Qeida wannabes based in the city, and the claim from the 'european al quieda' supports that. If Al Qeida were in fact behind it, i predict the death toll to be between one and two thousand. In theory (using military-grade explosives) this attack (assuming all transports were at full capacity) would have killed/injured around 1600+ people. Smuggling a single slab of C4 onto a London bus would be a walk in the park, and so their only constraint was resources.
i agree...

I think its AQ wanabees

The major effect of this is that the G8 are going to be united now

It was the Damned French or the IRA

I believe it was Muslim Extremists, simply because in recent memory I cant think of any other group doing something this large and claiming responsibility for it.

I cant believe some people are poking fun at this, I havent watched the news in some time but last I saw it was something like 700 ppl injured and 37 killed....thats nothing to have yourself a laugh over.

lol if the CIA were responsible then there is no way MI5 wouldn't have seen it coming, the CIA are a little easier to keep tabs on than random Muslims spread throughout the United Kingdom

It was the Damned French or the IRA

The IRA wouldn't be that dumb. The French couldn't have planned this in one day. More than likely it was a splinter group of Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda proper.

France, if they can't have the Olympics, no-one can. :p

Seriously though, no offence meant to anyone.

I think the most likely suspects at this stage would be muslim extremists, due to the British involvement in Iraq. It's probably too early to have any real proof of anything yet, though.

The IRA wouldn't be that dumb. The French couldn't have planned this in one day. More than likely it was a splinter group of Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda proper.


Nice to see you again, hopefully on friendlier terms this time

yeah well this is a forum where everyone can see you. It's like joking about someones death at the wake. If you really have to joke to yourself or to your friends NOT where victims/relations of victims can see it especially not on the day it's happend!
It's just the way of the world that people live and die, just like the food chain. Although these attacks are barbaric and completely unnacceptable people forget that hundreds of thousands have died in the war.

Nice to see you again, hopefully on friendlier terms this time

likewise and I'm glad your safe. And if it was the french, when will Britain declare war?

The CIA? The guys who couldn't even kill Castro? Nice. I guess we all have to have a bogeyman of some kind in the back of our minds.

Seriously, look at the motivations;

1) Creates climate of fear, attack in Britain during the G8 summit despite heightened security.
2) Attacks major transportation lines, classic AQ MO.
3) Uses similar attack tactics to Spain bombings, including demands for nations to leave Iraq.

If it was the CIA, they'd be hoping against hope that they would not be traced, that Britain would unite in favor of the war (by no means a garuntee), and hope that the fact that an attack occured against a prepared major power wouldn't scare off the dozens of other nations wavering about the Iraq issue.

No, the CIA had no real motivation to do this. The gamble that the attack would pay off has VERY long odds. No, simple study of the MO and probable motivations will lead us to AQ or AQ related cells.

Monty Python isn't a plural.
Yes it is. It is a group of comedians.

likewise and I'm glad your safe. And if it was the french, when will Britain declare war?


I don't know but if I was of age I would be the first new recruit.

Wait till tommorrow , its going to be business as usual, not a normal day by any means but we are gonna prove we are going to beat the terrorists that this is not going to break us. When we can't function then they win, no way are they going to win

If this was perpetrated by Middle Eastern terrorists, they don't have as good a grasp on how the media works as some here believe. The terrorists have just created martyrs out of many of the citizens of one of the most powerful countries on Earth. That is not a very smart PR move.

If they where aiming to get britain out of Iraq this was a bad move. (Im pretty sure that) the majority of brits wanted the troops out of Iraq before this attack, but what they think now is a coin toss.exactamente...

this was not done by AQ...

one possibility is a local n00b AQ wannabees...trying to get attention.

Hello?

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you are 1) english and 2) against the freedom fighters known as the Irish Republican Army. Face it, during the Troubles, you brits got what you deserved at the hands of the Irish Defenders. However, I DO NOT support the attack which occured today because it was 1) done by rag-heads, not the Irish and 2) was directed completly at civilans, not at loyalist paramilitaries or the english government, so I sympethize with those who died today, but not with those who died in the Troubles.

If you'd like to explain to me how the IRA's bombing of Manchester's Arndale center back in '97 (I think it was '97, anyway) was an attack directed at loyalist paramilitaries or the English government rather than a random bombing just because the target was there, I may give your opinions some credit. If you'd like to explain to me how calling in a false bomb threat on a stretch of the M6 which caused said part of the motorway to be closed down all day and my primary school (which was right next to the stretch threatened) shut for the day and all students sent home was an attack at the government, be my guest.

It royally pisses me off when people call the IRA anything other than what they were - terrorists. I have been affected personally by the actions of the IRA; the Arndale bombing frightened the life out of me, as I was around 11 years old and in Manchester at the time. The stretch of M6 shut down by that bomb threat was with a half mile of my house, and right next to my school. The silence that day due to the lack of background motorway noise was eerily terrifying. I have a cousin who was kneecapped by members of the IRA for informing on them. To this day he is confined to a wheelchair, a shadow of the man he once was.

I don't care what the aims behind terror tactics are, I will never ever condone them, having felt the terror of them first hand. If you think the IRA are some kind of glorified 'freedom fighters', you are sorely mistaken. They were and always will be criminals and terrorists.

EDIT: I've just looked it up, and the Arndale bombing was June 15th, 1996 - just over a week before my 10th birthday. Imagine, if you will, how terrifying witnessing an explosion of that magnitude is to a 10 year old child. It doesn't matter if nobody died in that attack; the fact of the matter is that it was terrorism, plain and simple, with no real motive or result. It was the equivalent of a young child smashing glass bottles against a wall because he enjoys the noise (which I myself did as a child). Tell how that serves to further the aims of these so-called 'freedom fighters' of yours?

To the post below me; is the "Here, here" directed at me? If so, thank you - if not, never mind :)

Here, Here

I cannot believe that we are even discussing the possibility that CIA could have something to do with this.

It was a known thing that the currect bombings were a matter of *when* not *if* given the amount of recruition going on for Jihad.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/10329634?source=Evening%20Standard

http://www.rediff.com/news/2005/mar/07uk.htm
200 terrorists on UK streets'

March 07, 2005 15:57 IST

The United Kingdom may be harboring 200 Al Qaeda activists, London's former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens has warned.

http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/jul/07raman.htm

It's the Al Qaeda again

July 07, 2005

The synchronised explosions in London on July 7 seem to be the handiwork of the Al Qaeda and the International Islamic Front (IIF) formed by it in February, 1998.

The first indication that pro-Al Qaeda terrorist elements were planning a major terrorist strike in London came in August last year following the arrest in Lahore by the Pakistani authorities of one Mohammad Naeem Noor Khan, a Pakistani computer expert, who used to live partly in London and partly in Pakistan.

During his interrogation, he admitted that he was working for the Al Qaeda as a communications expert and that he used to trasmit all messages from Osama bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders in a coded form to the Al Qaeda cadres in different countries.He also reportedly told the Pakistani authorities that the Al Qaeda had planned a terrorist strike at Heathrow airport in London.

Al Qaeda planned to attack Heathrow airport

On the basis of the information given by Noor Khan, the British authorities arrested Dhiren Bharot alias Bilal, a Hindu convert to Islam, and 11 others, seven of them of Pakistani origin.

Noor Khan was reported to have told the Pakistani authorities that Dhiren, who was also known as al-Brittani, was the leader of an Al Qaeda cell in the UK and had in the past been sent by Khalid Sheikh Mohammad of the Al Qaeda, who had orchestrated the 9/11 terrorist strikes in the US, to the US to select suitable economic targets in New York for attack.

The British did not give details of what they had ascertained during the interrogation of the arrested persons, but gave out that their interrogation did not corroborate the Pakistani version of a planned terrorist strike in Heathrow.

13 Asians held in UK terror raids

Investigations made by the intelligence and security agencies of West Europe after the Madrid blasts of March 2004 revealed that the Al Qaeda had a large number of supporters in the Muslim diaspora of West Europe.

In its annual report on the action against terrorism in Europe, the EU had also drawn attention to this fact. Morrocans and Pakistanis constituted the largest number of terrorist suspects arrested and questioned in West Europe last year.

About 70 Muslims from the UK, many of them of Pakistani origin, were estimated to have gone to Iraq last year and joined the local Al Qaeda unit headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

'200 terrorists on UK streets'

Following the reported participation of one of them in a suicide mission, the British Police had recently made some arrests in the UK, but they have not revealed the identities of those arrested.

Thus, the British authorities were apparently aware of the presence of suspected Al Qaeda sleeper cells in the Muslim diaspora in the UK and had been closely monitoring their activities for nearly a year.

The fact that despite this, the perpetrators of the blasts managed to carry them out speak well of their motivation and ability to plan and execute terrorist strikes in total secrecy.

In June, in response to a request from a US security consultancy group asking for my comments on likely future scenarios in the US homeland, I had said: "A new anti-US hub, which is emerging, is the Muslim diaspora in West Europe, consisting of Muslims, who had migrated to different countries of West Europe from the countries of the Islamic world. Osama bin Laden and his ideology have a growing following in this diaspora---particularly among Muslims of Moroccan and Pakistani origin, who constitute the largest number of terrorist suspects detained for questioning in connection with the investigation of different terrorist incidents. The countries needing a special watch are the UK, Spain and France. It is my assessment that there is likely to be another attempt for a 9/11-like terrorist strike in the US homeland in retaliation for the alleged descecration of the Holy Koran. Saudi, Moroccan and Pakistani nationals or foreign nationals of Saudi,Moroccan and Pakistani origin are likely to play the leadership as well as the foot-jihadi roles in the efforts to plan, mount and execute another catastrophic terrorist strike in the US homeland. Saudis are in the forefront of the current terrorist wave in Iraq and Pakistanis in Afghanistan. Moroccans played a central role in the terrorist strikes in Madrid last year."

Al Qaeda 2.0: Where will it strike next?

"While the devices used for triggering off an explosion are becoming more and more sophisticated, the explosives actually used are more and more commonplace.The use of sophisticated explosives such as the Semtex, the RDX etc has given place to more commonplace ones such as nitrogenous fertilisers, whose acquisition is unlikely to give rise to suspicion. It is only a question of time before the terrorists start using the fuel contained in the tank of any automobile as an explosive and incendiary device for causing casualties and material damage. All they need to do is to devise a mechanism by which a suicide terrorist can cause an explosion in his fuel tank while at the steering wheel of his vehicle. If they manage to do so, prevention can become an impossibility."

My assessment was that the next Al Qaeda strike would again be in the US. Instead, it has come in the UK. It is apparent that the terrorist strikes had been deliberately planned to coincide with the G-8 summit, to create the maximum impact and take advantage of the fact that the attention of the British agencies would have been focused on protecting the VVIPs attending the summit.

Bush wasn't exactly happy that the G8 wouldn't be focusing on terrorism as much.
So he goes and kills a bunch of Brits? Like he killed a bunch of Russians when the bilateral terrorism talks didn't work out to well (which is much more direct)? Oh wait.

We're about to have a Supreme Court Justice nominated and debated on in the Senate.
And a bombing in Britain will totally allow Bush to ramrod anyone he wants through the Senate.

American opinion of the war in Iraq has been relatively low as of late...
And dead British citizens is supposto make us think Bush has fucked that place up less how?

And this attack simply reiterates the picture that Bush always like to paint of Good vs Evil.
If Bush killed just to get a philosophical or public relations point across, there'd be a lot more dead.

If it is indeed the Muslim extremists (which I believe it to be), then it works out well for the Bush Administration. If it really was the CIA, it's not surprising.
I'd say it would be dramatically suprising.

Links to CIA operations proving that the CIA likes to dick with politics...
Assassinations and invasions are not the same as intentional murder of civilians. At the time, neither were illegal under US law.

Dicking with politics is the CIA's job. Terrorism is dicking with politics. But not all dicking with politics is terrorism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_pigs_invasion
Cuban civilians weren't targets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_PBSUCCESS
Supporting a coup in Guatemala is not the same thing as slaughtering Guatemalan civilians because you don't like public opinion there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Just_Cause
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
See PBSUCCESS.

I don't think it's muslim extremists. It's uncharacteristic of them.

They like to release video of themselves taking the blame for it- it makes more of a media splash. it's instantly accessible and extremely easy to run through a newscast. This one is just a written statement...not very media-friendly. They like everyone to know what they've done, why they've done it, and what they want changed.

I voted anarchists, because i think it was a psychotic anarchist, a la Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City Bombing). Think about it- if this happened ten years ago, it wouldn't have had a second thought to say it was a tragedy and have a huge police involvement. Now we all think terrorists automatically. It's the perfect climate for a tiny cell or even an individual to do terrible acts of violence and get away with it.

I hope he/she/they don't get away with it.

likewise and I'm glad your safe. And if it was the french, when will Britain declare war?

Did they ever declare peace?

I live in London and I spent most of today phoning round to check all family and friends were ok. One family member was outside Oxford street station when the bomb there went off. Fortunately she was not hurt but is in shock. I was born in England and my parents were born in Eire I went through the whole of the 70's getting hell from people everytime the IRA bombed somewhere in England. I am aware of how the Muslim community in this country will be feeling now because like the Irish in the UK during "the troubles" they will be wondering what their co-workers will say or do to them in the morning. I laughed for the first time today reading the spoofs blaming the French I would like to thank you for that laugh because it means there is hope. Hope is what you need to get through this kind of shit and bags of it. I'm going to bed now because I am totally exhausted. Take care everyone and if you had a fight with a loved one today forget and tell them your sorry because you never know what tomorrow will bring. :fluffle:

...because times don't change.

It used to be that when you wanted to fight a war, you sent a diplomat to declare war, then you lined your forces up neatly in their pretty, sparkly uniforms across the field from your adversary's forces in their pretty, sparkly uniforms...

Since then...war has morphed more, and more, and more, and more toward urban ops and terrorism...

What kind of political difference do you think the CIA would've made had they showed up with Americans dressed in Civil War uniforms in Iraq?

I live in London and I spent most of today phoning round to check all family and friends were ok. One family member was outside Oxford street station when the bomb there went off. Fortunately she was not hurt but is in shock. I was born in England and my parents were born in Eire I went through the whole of the 70's getting hell from people everytime the IRA bombed somewhere in England. I am aware of how the Muslim community in this country will be feeling now because like the Irish in the UK during "the troubles" they will be wondering what their co-workers will say or do to them in the morning. I laughed for the first time today reading the spoofs blaming the French I would like to thank you for that laugh because it means there is hope. Hope is what you need to get through this kind of shit and bags of it. I'm going to bed now because I am totally exhausted. Take care everyone and if you had a fight with a loved one today forget and tell them your sorry because you never know what tomorrow will bring. :fluffle:

My condolences to you and whichever family member was witness to the bombing. It can't have been easy worrying about people you knew in London; luckily I didn't have to deal with it this time (although I very nearly did), but my father was in New York on 9/11 and was scheduled to do the whole tourist thing, which included the WTC. As much as I don't like the man, we had a very tense few hours before we found out he was OK. And as I said, my thoughts go out to your family member who was there when the blast went off - like I said above, I've witnessed terrorist attacks, and it's a harrowing experience. I hope she gets over the shock of it ASAP.

Reading this, it strikes me that my family seem to attract terrorist attacks :rolleyes: Maybe I should dig a big bomb shelter and never leave it for the rest of my life :D

...because times don't change.

It used to be that when you wanted to fight a war, you sent a diplomat to declare war, then you lined your forces up neatly in their pretty, sparkly uniforms across the field from your adversary's forces in their pretty, sparkly uniforms...

Since then...war has morphed more, and more, and more, and more toward urban ops and terrorism...

What kind of political difference do you think the CIA would've made had they showed up with Americans dressed in Civil War uniforms in Iraq?

Okay, well aside from the resident consipiracy theorist on this thread, it seems the "CIA" factor has been resolved. Left with only vauge word associations and non-facts, conjecture has taken place of arguments.

Now I have a real quesiton for people on this board. I fell asleep shortly after the bombings were announced, so I haven't heard anything about this since. Were there secondary bombs planted? To hit the first responders as they came in? I heard something about such devices as I drifted off, but I don't know if any were found or not.

The presence of such bombs would be a very good indication of who was responsible. It would basically be down to AQ/AQ related cells and the long-shot Chechyan possibility.

My condolences to you and whichever family member was witness to the bombing. It can't have been easy worrying about people you knew in London; luckily I didn't have to deal with it this time (although I very nearly did), but my father was in New York on 9/11 and was scheduled to do the whole tourist thing, which included the WTC. As much as I don't like the man, we had a very tense few hours before we found out he was OK. And as I said, my thoughts go out to your family member who was there when the blast went off - like I said above, I've witnessed terrorist attacks, and it's a harrowing experience. I hope she gets over the shock of it ASAP.

Reading this, it strikes me that my family seem to attract terrorist attacks :rolleyes: Maybe I should dig a big bomb shelter and never leave it for the rest of my life :D

May I suggest Belize? No one ever bombs Belize... and they speak English! :)

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bh.html
http://www.belize.gov.bz/belize/welcome.shtml

May I suggest Belize? No one ever bombs Belize... and they speak English! :)

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bh.html
http://www.belize.gov.bz/belize/welcome.shtml

*Dons travelling cap* One flight to Belize, please! :D






NB: I don't actually own a travelling cap :) And ooo, my post rhymed, wow

Irak? >.> :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :confused: :gundge: Idiots v.v.. Btw, what are Anarchists? Because that's what I voted for.

That's disgusting. Do you really have such a low opinion of us? Do you really think America would condone killing British civilians in cold blood on the gamble that it might help solidify British commitment? There was no chance that the troops would pull out before the bombing; the government was too committed.

Hell, I have that low an opinion of us. I don't think it's bloody likely but I wouldn't put it past us either.

Irak? >.> :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :confused: :gundge: Idiots v.v.. Btw, what are Anarchists? Because that's what I voted for.

Why did you vote for them if you don't know what they are?

All I can say is wow.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/10329634?version=1

... then you're saying that innocent people, going about their everyday lives....deserve to die for the choices made by politicians.
innocent people never deserve to die...Afghans, Iraqis, USian, British, Irish, Spanish civilians do not deserve to die...

yet they do die for the choices made by politicians.

when there is occupation...when there is state aggression...innocent civilians...men women and children will die.

when you send your soldiers to impose your will...innocent blood will be spilled...(mostly their blood)

pretending the contrary is daydreaming.

I have to agree with some of you that it was slightly out of character Muslim Extremists, only one suicide. And as for the CIA they are much better than that. France is a no, plainly because then they would have to do something and plus not their style. If it was them the bombs would have spelled out France in location connect the dots. Believe it or not their other groups out there, excluding the IRA I honestly doubt they are that stupid. The other issue with the Muslims idea is that Aldgate and Edgware are both heavily middle eastern areas, mostly Muslim. I'll try to stay on topic here for awhile, till my can get to my hotel.

innocent people never deserve to die...Afghans, Iraqis, USian, British, Irish, Spanish civilians do not deserve to die...

yet they do die for the choices made by politicians.

when there is occupation...when there is state aggression...innocent civilians...men women and children will die.

when you send your soldiers to impose your will...innocent blood will be spilled...(mostly their blood)

pretending the contrary is daydreaming.

The post was not to say that it doesn't happen, or that we don't expect it to happen, but that innocents don't deserve to die for these reasons. A previous poster stated that 'us Brits' deserved everything we got during the troubles in Ireland - and by that, he meant the bombing of mainland English cities, which were completely seperate from the conflict.

innocent people never deserve to die...Afghans, Iraqis, USian, British, Irish, Spanish civilians do not deserve to die...

yet they do die for the choices made by politicians.

when there is occupation...when there is state aggression...innocent civilians...men women and children will die.

when you send your soldiers to impose your will...innocent blood will be spilled...(mostly their blood)

pretending the contrary is daydreaming.
So you are saying that allowing for example the palestinians is wise to keep all those people alive? Sorry of topic, but I agree with innocent people, but blaming it entirely on politicians is slightly askewd(sp.?).

How come everyone who blaims the war on Iraq spells it "irak"??

Because they aren't quiet smart enough to figure out it's IRAQ
(i.e. DEMOCRATS)

All I can say is wow.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/10329634?version=1

I'm a little surprised they haven't been raided and rounded up yet. It seems reasonable to do so...

Because they aren't quiet smart enough to figure out it's IRAQ
(i.e. DEMOCRATS)
Aaaahhhheeemmm. We are not getting into politics here, and for your reference it would be Republicans, and I take personal offence to that. Not only that but when translated into certain languages its spelled Irak, not because they are spelling it incorectly. For future reference quiet means not loud, quite I believe is what you are looking for. :headbang:

They havent "rounded them up" because they have laws that protect them, much like the US's freedom of speach. :D

So you are saying that allowing for example the palestinians is wise to keep all those people alive? Sorry of topic, but I agree with innocent people, but blaming it entirely on politicians is slightly askewd(sp.?).
I do not understand...
.
.
.

anyhow...
Palestinean and Israely civileans die on a daily basis...and its all due to politicians and their actions in 1947 and 1948.

but I think you should not bring up Israel...its off topic.

I do not understand...
.
.
.

anyhow...
Palestinean and Israely civileans die on a daily basis...and its all due to politicians and their actions in 1947 and 1948.

but I think you should not bring up Israel...its off topic.
As I said and then switched back to your comment, oh you might not want to say something about Israel in the presence of an Israeli government employee. heheh just a hint. :p But yes I dont agree with you on the idea of politics in this case. :)

Originally Posted by the UnibloggerOkay, well aside from the resident consipiracy theorist on this thread,
I can't see this as anything other than a personal attack, Niccolo Medici. Renaming the "Originally posted by" line to make him into an insane bomber can really only be interpreted one way.

Knock it off, NOW.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

I can't see this as anything other than a personal attack, Niccolo Medici. Renaming the "Originally posted by" line to make him into an insane bomber can really only be interpreted one way.

Knock it off, NOW.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Game Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop
Thank you.

So you are saying that allowing for example the palestinians is wise to keep all those people alive? Sorry of topic, but I agree with innocent people, but blaming it entirely on politicians is slightly askewd(sp.?).im trying to make sense out of your words...

Im not able too....maybe im tired...with the stress of the bad news and all...

All I can say is wow.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/10329634?version=1

I've been saying this since this morning. A lot of people have this image of the SAS jetting off to "take out" foreign terrorists: but, as I have asked them, are you willing to accept the SAS taking them out in the event that they are british citizens who reside in the UK?

I have no doubt that some of the people involved in this attack are likely UK citizens who are long time residents of the UK.

It's not at all surprising.

Assassinations and invasions are not the same as intentional murder of civilians. At the time, neither were illegal under US law..
at the time?
when was that? ...what date are you talking about?
.
.
.
BTW international murder of civilians IS the same as assassinations.

BTW international murder of civilians IS the same as assassinations.
Almost, but not quite, technically.

Whoever did it needs to be brought to justice.

I think I will place blame for the London attacks on the people who blew up the bombs. After all, if the bombs had not gone off, I don't think people would have died or gotten hurt. Just a thought.

It really isn't fair though when US foreign policy provokes ire that is directed at its allies and not at America. It's as if in a way we were gambling British security and not our own when we went into Iraq. In a way I don't blame you guys for getting pissed at us.

But maybe that was Al Quaeda's main reason for attacking London. Sowing discord amongst allies would only further isolate America from the rest of the world. Whatever the reasons it's very sad that this was slated to happen.

I think I will place blame for the London attacks on the people who blew up the bombs. After all, if the bombs had not gone off, I don't think people would have died or gotten hurt. Just a thought.

It really isn't fair though when US foreign policy provokes ire that is directed at its allies and not at America. It's as if in a way we were gambling British security and not our own when we went into Iraq. In a way I don't blame you guys for getting pissed at us.

But maybe that was Al Quaeda's main reason for attacking London. Sowing discord amongst allies would only further isolate America from the rest of the world. Whatever the reasons it's very sad that this was slated to happen.
Ameriker (as the Brits like to pronounce it...hopefully that is taken as a joke...) didn't make anyone go to War with Iraq.

Well we did threaten some smaller countries with economic ruin if they didn't join us, but you're right for the most part it was voluntary.

I'm a Londoner and I made a point yesterday of not getting involved in discussing the political ramifications of the bombings because, as far as I was concerned, that day was to be spent checking on the safety of loved ones and then sitting back with a few friends, having a few beers and just trying to wind down.

This morning I caught my usual bus to work and, to my surprise, it felt quite good. A routine, a knowledge that the way I go about living my life doesn't have to change and nor should it, at least with respect to the mundane. There aren't many of us in work today, but still a significant number. My job depresses me as much as it usually does, I still spend too much time mucking around on the internet, I still drink too much coffee.

What a relief.

Many people have been offended by the 'humour' (some good, most terrible). I'm grateful for it. Not just silly or senseless humour, but properly close-to-the-wire, potentially offensive, savage and incisive humour that makes you laugh and then makes you feel guilty: that's what I wanted yesterday and, thankfully, I got it, from my friends and from my region's offsite forum (hell, these people are my friends, too).

It was a unique experience; eighty-some e-mails flying around during the day to confirm people's safety, not to mention a dozen texts at least once the phone network was up and running. Messages as late as 10pm finally setting my mind at rest.

Random thoughts I've had:

* Thank fuck it's 7/7. Had it been a day later, we'd probably have had the moronic American dating system foisted on us: 7/8? No! 8/7, thank you very much.

* Blair and his cronies best not use this as an argument for ID cards.

* Nor should they clamp down any further on our civil liberties with ill-conceived anti-terror legislation; we have gone too far in sacrificing our liberty as it is. The terrorists don't need any extra help in their mission to destroy our way of life.

* Could Tony Blair possibly insert. any. more. pauses. in. his. speeches? And the more he uses the word 'resolved', the less he persuades me that he is.

* Ken Livingstone's speech was excellent. I appreciated the way he didn't hide his rage. He, again, has come across has being very genuine, for all his flaws.

* Bush's speech offended me - it struck me as naked opportunism to justify his actions.

* I fear for the Muslim community. I'd love to see Londoners and the country in general brought together by this tragedy, but I don't see it happening, at least not beyond the short term.

* What happens at the G8 now?

* We were lucky. It could have been so much worse; for me, personally, too. A very close friend was just 100m from the bus that was destroyed.

The political impact of yesterday's attacks are hard to assess. I imagine there'll be a polarising of opinion; I, for one, remain wedded to the opinion that our civil liberties must not be sacrificed and that our government has jeopardised our security with its foolhardy military adventurism. Others will disagree, and more vehemently than before. I understand why.

I'm still loath to really point fingers and apportion blame. It's too early to say; my remarks on Blair and co stand from before the attacks and I don't feel that much has changed in my head in the last 24 hours or so. And, really, I'm not convinced that much will change in the country at large. No seismic shift in political thinking. Business as usual, sooner rather than later.

My employers have just announced that lunch will be complimentary today. Silver linings, eh?

innocent people never deserve to die...Afghans, Iraqis, USian, British, Irish, Spanish civilians do not deserve to die...

Don't you mean JEs, AJs, UKGBNIans, Irish, and Kingdoms do not deserve to die?

Jomhuri-ye Eslami-ye Afghanestan
Al Jumhuriyah al Iraqiyah
United States of America
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Kingdom of Spain

...for EVERY.OTHER.COUNTRY you took the last name (read: conventional short name) for the country. Why?

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN "USian", except in your warped, wannabe politically correct mind!!
Citizens of the United States of America -- we've been called Americans by the world at large for CENTURIES. :rolleyes:

yet they do die for the choices made by politicians.

when there is occupation...when there is state aggression...innocent civilians...men women and children will die.

when you send your soldiers to impose your will...innocent blood will be spilled...(mostly their blood)

pretending the contrary is daydreaming.

Yep. The same way none of this was deserved.... (see the list below)

WAKE UP! Saying yesterday's attack was due to the war in Iraq is like saying that World War 2 was fought to end the Holocaust. Simply put, it's not only chronologically incorrect, but it's FALSE.

• 1983 April 18 U.S. Embassy Bombing in Beirut, Lebanon kills 63
• 1983 September 23 Gulf Air Flight 771 is bombed, killing all 117 people on board
• 1983 October 23 Marine Barracks Bombing in Beirut kills 241 U.S. Marines. 58 French troops from the multinational force are also killed in a separate attack.
• 1985 TWA Flight 847 hijacking
• 1985 October 7 - October 10 Achille Lauro cruise ship hijacking by Palestinian Liberation Front, during which passenger Leon Klinghoffer is shot dead.
• 1985 EgyptAir Flight 648 hijacked by Abu Nidal group, flown to Malta, where Egyptian commandos storm plane; 60 are killed by gunfire and explosions.
• 1986 TWA Flight 840 bombed on approach to Athens airport; 4 Americans, including an infant, are killed.
• 1986 April 6 the La Belle discotheque in Berlin, a known hangout for U.S. soldiers, was bombed, killing 3 and injuring 230 people, for which Libya is held responsible. In retaliation, the US bombs Libya in Operation El Dorado Canyon and tries to kill dictator Qaddafi.
• 1986 Pan Am Flight 73, an American civilian airliner, is hijacked; 22 people die when plane is stormed in Karachi, Pakistan.
• 1988 Pan Am Flight 103 bombing (Lockerbie). The worst act of terrorism against the United States prior to September 11, 2001.
• 1989 Avianca Flight 203 bombed over Colombia
• 1993 February 26 World Trade Center bombing kills 6 and injures over 1000 people
• 1993 Failed New York City landmark bomb plot
• 1993 Mir Aimal Kansi, a Pakistani, fires an AK-47 assault rifle into cars waiting at a stoplight in front of the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters. Two died.
• 1994 December 11 A small bomb explodes on board Philippine Airlines Flight 434, killing a Japanese businessman. Authorities found out that Ramzi Yousef planted the bomb to test it for his planned terrorist attack.
• 1995 Operation Bojinka is discovered on a laptop computer in a Manila, Philippines apartment by authorities after an apartment fire occurred in the apartment.
• 1995 Bombing of military compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
• 1996 June 25 Khobar Towers bombing
• 1997 A terrorist opened fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building in New York City, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland and France before turning the gun on himself. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claimed this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine".
• 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, killing 225 people and injuring more than 4,000.
• 1999 Ahmed Ressam is arrested on the United States-Canada border in Port Angeles, Washington; he confessed to planning to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport as part of the 2000 millennium attack plots
• 1999 Jordanian authorities foil a plot to bomb US and Israeli tourists in Jordan and pick up 28 suspects as part of the 2000 millennium attack plots
• 2000 The last of the 2000 millennium attack plots fails, as the boat meant to bomb USS The Sullivans sinks
• 2000 October 12 USS Cole bombing kills 17 US sailors
• 2001 September 11, 2001 attacks kill almost 3,000 in a series of hijacked airliner crashes into two landmarks: the World Trade Center in New York City, New York, and The Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia. A fourth plane crashes in Somerset County, Pennsylvania.
• 2001 Paris embassy attack plot foiled
• 2001 Richard Reid, attempting to destroy American Airlines Flight 63, is subdued by passengers and flight attendants before he could detonate his shoe bomb
• 2002 Singapore embassies attack plot foiled
• 2002 June 14 attack outside U.S. Consulate in Karachi
• 2002 Kidnapping and murder of journalist Daniel Pearl
• 2002 October 12 Bali car bombing of holidaymakers kills 202
• 2003 Riyadh Compound Bombings - bombings of United States expat housing compounds in Saudi Arabia kill 26 and injure 160. Al-Qaeda blamed
• 2003 Casablanca Attacks in Casablanca, Morocco leaves 41 dead. The attack involved 12 bombers and 5 targets. The targets were "Western and Jewish". Attack attributed to a Moroccan al-Qaeda-linked group
• 2003 Canal Hotel Bombing in Baghdad, Iraq kills 22 people including the top UN representative, Sergio Vieira de Mello
• 2003-2004 In response to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the Iraqi insurgency in that country stage dozens of suicide bombings, kidnappings and several beheadings targeting Iraqi, Coalition and humanitarian targets. Attacks on some coalition forces may not be terrorist attacks under Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions which gives lawful combatant status to non-uniformed guerrillas resisting foreign occupation if they display arms openly. As neither the US or Iraq have signed this protocol it is not applicable to attacks on US forces.
• 2003 October 15 - A bomb is detonated by Palestinians against a US diplomatic convoy in the Gaza Strip killing three Americans
• 2004 May 29 Al-Khobar massacres--Islamic terrorists kill 22 people at an oil compound in Saudi Arabia.
• 2004 December 6 Suspected al Qaeda-linked group attacks U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, killing 5 local employees.

How many times do you stand in the street and let the other guy hit you before you hit him back?

Markreich, I prefer Yanqui.

*cowers*

Ahem, anyway, I think what OceanDrive2 may be trying to say is that aggressive actions such as the war in Iraq may only be serving to radicalise certain people.

I'm not pretending I know what the answer is, nor am I claiming that the war in Iraq is a principle cause here. The problem seems to be that there have been so many tit-for-tat acts of aggression that ascribing blame is almost meaningless.

Markreich, I prefer Yanqui.

*cowers*

Ahem, anyway, I think what OceanDrive2 may be trying to say is that aggressive actions such as the war in Iraq may only be serving to radicalise certain people.

I'm not pretending I know what the answer is, nor am I claiming that the war in Iraq is a principle cause here. The problem seems to be that there have been so many tit-for-tat acts of aggression that ascribing blame is almost meaningless.

Yanqui is fine... just like wetback. :D

Which is woefully misguided. By that logic, England & France should never have declared war on Hitler for invading Poland. Or that it's okay to do nothing in Darfur, Rwanda or Jugoslavia. All it does is give agressors a blank check to attack anyone (and I mean ANYONE) freely. Don't like the US policy regarding Chile? Go blow up a Taco Bell in Dallas. Against abortion? Go kill some doctors. Sorry, I can't stand this philosophy of weakness.

The problem is human nature. Life is conflict.