Four London Blasts Kill 40, Injure 700

[hyegurl01]

London Blast

[MosJan]

1070am was saying - up to 50 are killed

[Z'areh]

This "protest" of British involvment in the war in Iraq (if it's that in the first place!) is turning into a futile bloodbath, mass murder, if you like.

 

These kinds of terrorist actions simply strengthen the hands of neo-cons both in England and the US. People (leaders) who are discredited in their reasonings to go to war will be "pardoned" in the eyes of the public faced with such terror.

 

Expect further controles (read:abuse) of personal freedoms, in the name of security.

 

This is stupid.

[vava]

This is stupid.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Agreed. It's stupid on both sides of the equation. No positives can come about from these types of actions. No one wins.

Edited July 7, 2005 by vava

[gamavor]

S*** happens!

[skhara]

Especially when Mossad Al Qaeda helps S*** happen.

 

It will be interesting if this gets pinned on Iran somehow.

[armjan]

Would someone please share their answer to this...

Do muslims hate jews? Why?

Surely there were strong feelings before the formation of the jewish state.

 

This hatred of muslims for the jews has caused countless # of deaths and will continue to cause grievences in our lives and those of our children. I wish we can send the people in the Middle East to Mars where they can duke it out!

[Armat]

Would someone please share their answer to this...

Do muslims hate jews? Why?

Surely there were strong feelings before the formation of the jewish state.

 

This hatred of muslims for the jews has caused countless # of deaths and will continue to cause grievences in our lives and those of our children. I wish we can send the people in the Middle East to Mars where they can duke it out!

style_images/master/snapback.png

I like gardening.

[armjan]

if the answer is so obvious, would you care to share?

[shaunt]

Surely there were strong feelings before the formation of the jewish state.

 

I'd say ever since Jews started displacing Palestinian Arabs in the late 1800's.

 

RIP to the victims. No doubt they will be avenged.

[skhara]

I'd say ever since Jews started displacing Palestinian Arabs in the late 1800's.

 

RIP to the victims. No doubt they will be avenged.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

No doubt? I doubt it greatly.

[kumkap]

this is how i feel about the whole situation:

 

--

 

Blowback Hits Britain

Londoners Pay Heavy Price for Blair's Deception

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

 

Do you feel safer now that George Bush's and Tony Blair's barbaric attacks on Iraq have brought barbaric attacks to London?

 

Coordinated attacks on London's transport system have apparently killed 38 and injured 700. It is a terrible thing but hardly surprising. Did Londoners really think that the British people would not be held accountable for electing and reelecting Tony Blair--a war criminal under the Nuremberg standard--who aided and abetted George Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq on false pretenses?

 

Did Londoners really believe that Muslims would have no response to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and the slaughter, torture, and detention of Muslims?

 

Blair and Bush are on their high horses claiming the morality of "civilized nations" and denouncing the retaliation they have provoked as "barbarism."

 

Their hypocrisy plays poorly in the world. Far more innocent Iraqi civilians, especially women and children, have been slaughtered than British and Americans. Why do Bush and Blair believe they should be praised for slaughtering civilians and only Muslims denounced?

 

Why do Americans think it is heroic and honorable for our troops to massacre Iraqis with bombs, missiles, gunships, tanks, and heavy machine guns, but cowardly and barbaric when our victims fight back in the only way they can?

The US and Britain started this fight, not Iraq. We should be ashamed that Bush and Blair deceived us, tricked us into a pointless and unjust war, and that innocent people on both sides are paying with their lives and limbs for Bush's and Blair's lies. Our real anger should be directed at Bush and Blair who are responsible for the deaths and destruction.

 

The American and British people had better wake up, depose their immoral leaders, and put a halt to this war.

 

There are 1.3 billion Muslims. The Iraqi insurgency has proved that Muslims are not intimidated by a "superpower." Unless the American and British people want a 30-year or a 100-year war with domestic police states for "security" reasons and a draft that will bleed their populations dry, this war needs to be wound up quickly with due apologies and reparations.

 

No more bluster and heroic talk from the two war criminals. The war is breeding terrorism and cannot be won. Only an even-handed diplomacy that breeds trust and ceases to rule Muslims with puppet governments can isolate and reduce terrorist acts. Muslims are not a few scattered Indian tribes with no place to hide who can be exterminated (emphasis added). America has no chance of imposing its will on the Muslim world. Muslims have their own will.

 

As long as Bush continues to operate with Mao's belief that power comes out of the barrel of a gun, terrorism will prosper and people will die for no reason except their refusal to hold corrupt leaders accountable.

 

Paul Craig Roberts has held a number of academic appointments and has contributed to numerous scholarly publications. He served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. His graduate economics education was at the University of Virginia, the University of California at Berkeley, and Oxford University. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com

 

--

 

the ululating moralizing you see from right-wingers right now is almost comical when you consider that these people didn't say a word or lose a minute's sleep when u.s and british forces slaughtered men, women, and children in fallujah, samarra, basra, and dozens of other cities in iraq over the last three years. nobody said "we are all iraqis today" after fallujah, they just treat these deaths as if they're roadkill. what is the difference between the murder of an innocent person in iraq and the murder of an innocent person in london? they will devote millions of dollars and thousands of hours to bringing the killers to justice, do they do the same for american and british terrorists who kill in iraq (refer to last several posts under "meet the u.s." topic if you wish to make light of u.s. atrocities in iraq). why do we have the death penalty in the u.s. for for americans who murder in the u.s., but not for americans who murder in iraq? there isn't even any punishment for them, because the u.s. has immunity from the world criminal court, and doesn't prosecute itself. crimes must be punished. when injustices are not punished (and those of the u.s. and britain never are), people will sooner or later take matters into their own hands. my only bias in the world is against double standards. yes i'm sorry that innocent people were killed in london (my dad was born and raised there) but i am equally outraged when innocent people in iraq, afghanistan, and palestine are killed, and even more so when the killers are not brought to justice.

Edited July 8, 2005 by kumkap

[vava]

this is how i feel about the whole situation:

 

--

 

Muslims are not a few scattered Indian tribes with no place to hide who can be exterminated (emphasis added). America has no chance of imposing its will on the Muslim world. Muslims have their own will.

 

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

kumkap,

 

While I'm in agreement with the crux of the article, I must object to the quotation above that draws a crude (and even false) comparison to the 'Indians'. Would it be ok if Muslims were indeed like 'scattered Indian tribes'? Their annihilation could be justified if only it was easier to carry out? Or perhaps the author feels that what was done to the Indians wasn't as wrong as the warring campaigns against the Islamists today? It is this kind of 'heirarchical' perception that lies (amongst other factors) at the root of such conflicts, and belittling previous barbaric acts with presumptious comparasons certainly isn't going to help our societies 'breed' mutual trust.

 

Otherwise, the article hits the mark - violence (justified or not) begets more violence. It points to a bleak future where the circle of "security/safety" vs. "liberation/terrorism" will only grow until we have to establish gated compounds like the medieval warlords - keep a select few safe/rich and leave the riff-raff and peasantry to fend for themselves. Pretty sad.

[kumkap]

vava,

 

i think we read that part differently b/c i didn't really see him saying that the extermination of the native americans was less of a crime. to me he is just observing from certain segments of american society the same chauvinism inherent to manifest destiny that serves as a motivating factor in the violence against a foreign non-white people and that same white instinct to exterminate that was unleashed on native americans. the difference he points out that is that muslims are a much larger block with perhaps a greater sense of group solidarity and much greater resistance to cultural and military domination than perhaps the native americans were, although i admit i am not an expert on native american cultures and society. it is so ingrained in these people's heads that white/european culture is superior in every way to other cultures that they can't even fathom that other people have a right to defend their culture against american imperialism. those that resist should be wiped out, according to people like ann coulter. but as i pointed out in this post, in middle easterners they are finally being confronted by a people with a much richer culture and longer history than they have, and one that even forms the basis for their own culture. don't forget, no middle east, no christianity. no christianity, no european/white civilization.

 

anyway i think you're right about the gated compounds thing. we are headed that way and it's pretty sad.

Edited July 8, 2005 by kumkap

[Armat]

I disagree with the writer on the promise that Muslims killing innocent westerners is equivalent to US and British troops actions.

US and British troops are trying to restore some kind of order where potential or the seed for democracy can prosper under extremely dangerous and hustle environment and to believe Allied troops go out of their way to kill innocent civilians is nonsense. Sure they are examples where mistakes happened and some soldiers may have shot innocent civilians however these cases are in extreme minority. Muslim terrorists or religious zealots with extreme hatred of everything western act with clear objective of keeping the status quote. Please if left on their own Arab nations would rot another century in despotism, oppression of civil liberties, massacres (Kurds) etc.

I do agree that the reasons going to war was very dubious and unjust however now that the mess is created best we can do is establish free democratic Iraq.

[ED]

Not that I would justify the bombings in London, I think it’s a cowardly act killing the innocent, but Armat,

How do you know US, and so called coalition forces are not killing innocent civiliance in Iraq or Afghanistan?

 

the London bombings does not justify anything, more it does not give green light to Bush nor Blair for there imperialistic ideology.

 

They have created an enemy which has no boundaries, no country, we can’t see or know who they are, longer Osama stays free better it is for bush and neo-cons

 

There is a talk of 3rd term for bush because we are in a war

Personally I'm sick of it; it does not take a genius to figure it out,

This administration has lied, deceived and orchestrated “a reason” for invasion of Iraq, and according to Chaney the Dick! The war could go on for decades.

 

IMPOSING AMERICAN IDIOLOGY AND DEMOCRACY AROUND THE WORLD, if necessary by FORCE!

This is a neo-con ideology and it’s doomed to fail sooner or later.

 

There are far more and much dangerous terrorist among white supremacists then there is from Muslim world!

[Sasun]

Agreed Edward. Someone who deceives his own people and the whole world to invade another country cannot and should not be trusted with something like building democracy. The "democracy" and "liberty" rheotoric are simple lies. A liar who never confessed of his old lies will surely keep lying and deceiving. These guys have not solved a single problem in the world as far as security and fighting terrorism are concerned. They have only added to the world terrorism by their own acts, and created even more reasons for more muslim terrorists to show up. They are only good to give pompous and juvenile speeches on morality, humanity, bla bla bla... hypocrits... in the meantime, the number of victims on boths sides keeps increasing.

[shaunt]

Someone who deceives his own people and the whole world to invade another country...

 

Is an extremely smart man.

[Armat]

How do you know US, and so called coalition forces are not killing innocent civiliance in Iraq or Afghanistan?

style_images/master/snapback.png

Ed, I don’t believe they deliberately are killing innocent people. Some mistakes are unavoidable such as a bomb falling on the wrong house, wedding etc.I emphasize the intent here.

[Sasun]

Ed, I don’t believe they deliberately are killing innocent people. Some mistakes are unavoidable such as a bomb falling on the wrong house, wedding etc.I emphasize the intent here.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Armat, if you know that your bombs are not 100% accurate, and as a result of that some innocent people will die then it is not much different to delibirately kill innocent people. We can't say that they are outright bombing civilian places, sure, that's not the case. Nonetheless, they are responsible for the unintended loss of civilian lives.

If you drive your car drunk, at 130 miles an hour, even though you have no intentions of killing people, it is quite certain that someone will die at some point. It is almost a certain thing.

Now, as far as starting a war and invading a country, it is 100% certain that there will be civilian deaths. Therefore, those who started are responsible for such deaths.

[MosJan]

"Terror - it’s a last resort for people who feel powerless when confronting a major power."

 

 

Terror = last resort ???

 

It is not so easy to reach the last resort. To get there, one must indeed try everything (which is a lot of things)-and not just once, as if a political party or movement might organize a single demonstration, fail to win immediate victory, and claim that it is now justified in moving on to murder.

 

The same argument applies to state officials who claim that they have tried everything and are now compelled to Go to WAR or bomb  villages. What exactly did USA &  UK  try when they were trying everything?  Talkinig to  Sadam  or taliban

[skhara]

IMPOSING AMERICAN IDIOLOGY AND DEMOCRACY AROUND THE WORLD, if necessary by FORCE!

This is a neo-con ideology and it’s doomed to fail sooner or later.

 

Who says this is American anything? Was Marxism-Leninism-Trotskyism a Russian idiology?

 

Actually, I guess I can answer my question. Yes they were/are American and Russian idiologies. Since certain "ideologies" have the capacity to brainwash masses of idiots.

Edited July 8, 2005 by skhara

[Armat]

Armat, if you know that your bombs are not 100% accurate, and as a result of that some innocent people will die then it is not much different to delibirately kill innocent people. We can't say that they are outright bombing civilian places, sure, that's not the case. Nonetheless, they are responsible for the unintended loss of civilian lives.

If you drive your car drunk, at 130 miles an hour, even though you have no intentions of killing people, it is quite certain that someone will die at some point. It is almost a certain thing.

Now, as far as starting a war and invading a country, it is 100% certain that there will be civilian deaths. Therefore, those who started are responsible for such deaths.

style_images/master/snapback.png

Sasun,your argument is unreasonable. Has there been a conflict where innocent people did not die?

Remember that even before Iraqi conflict the Muslim terrorists were killing innocent civilians such as bombings of the embassies in Africa, world trade center etc.

I still maintain that comparison of the writer of the article is not of logical order.

 

It is interesting to see if large Muslim community in London would comes out in large street protests against terrorism, which carry under the name of Islam. It is sadly the case that most of these communities are silently approve the killings even though it goes against the Islamic teachings.

Edited July 8, 2005 by Armat

[ED]

then its fair to say I would fight the fight in any shape or form which is available, AS A LAST RESORT to a with a superpower who is there NOT TO SPREAD DEMOCRACY BUT FOR OOOOLLLLLLL, pardon who said AFRICA? no nooooo....SYRIA, IRAN! WAR WAR WAR... ops bad me and a draft maybe, since us armed forces are not meating there recruting minimals!

 

 

Armat its not a boxing match and no one from the stand point of those who blow them selfs up could tell them.....you cant hit me below the belt!

[ED]

Who says this is American anything?  Was Marxism-Leninism-Trotskyism a Russian idiology?

 

Actually, I guess I can answer my question.  Yes they were/are American and Russian idiologies.  Since certain "ideologies" have the capacity to brainwash masses of idiots.

style_images/master/snapback.png

 

 

yah yah yah Shkara, so i left the J word out, sue me is there anything else that I have missed ?

Edited July 8, 2005 by Edward