London Bombings

[EC]

I'm surprised that I'm the first to comment on today's terrorist bombings in London. We can only hope that this is the wake up call here at home that reinvigorates the War on Terror. Maybe now is the appropriate time to drum up support for attacks on Syria and Iran. Hopefully the Left shuts their mouths about surrendering in Iraq that they've been calling for lately. It's time that everyone realizes that this a world war that must be won if Western society is to survive and prosper.

[Mistress Moon]

Hopefully the Left shuts their mouths about surrendering in Iraq that they've been calling for lately. 

If you read the discussions on My Yahoo, the Left hasn't learned anything. Apparently, terrorism is still somehow Bush's fault. Of course, these same people blame hurricanes on Bush. You have to laugh a little. I don't know why I read these posts, but I somehow can't help myself. It can sometimes be a frightening experience. And anyone that has any kind of rational sense is automatically labeled a Bush-lover.

[Capitalism Forever]

London Bombings, Wake Up Call?

Those who were not woken up by 9/11 will not be woken up by anything.

[The Wrath]

I don't really care if it wake up hippie protestors...but it isn't out of the realm of possibility for it to wake up the leaders of Western countries. Then again, the Madrid bombings didn't do it, and a lot more people died in that incident than in today's London bombings.

[fatdogs12]

I am sick of all these terrorist attacks. I agree, down with Syria and Iran (IRAN esp.). No more invasions, just bombings. Just destroy them, or just lots of mini nukes.

Ahh well, we will probably continue to be held hostage by the muslim terrorists.

[Praxus]

Nuke the Kabba. Plain and simple.

[HaloNoble6]

Let's not drift into the ranks of Little Green Footballs now, ya hear?

I agree with Roland, if 9/11 wasn't a.) enough to wake people up at all or b.) enough to wake people up for the rest of their lives then this will likely not do much beyond temporarily silence the liberals/progressives/moonbats/democrats who sympathize and/or support the Islamicists.

[fatdogs12]

Let's not drift into the ranks of Little Green Footballs now, ya hear?

what is that?

[HaloNoble6]

Little Green Footballs is a very popular blog/news aggregator that has very up to date news regarding Islamacists. The comments that are left under each post are often more like "nuke the muslim dogs" than insightful contributions. It seems as though people tend to post there just to be seen (since there's a ton of traffic) and less to contribute anything of substance. This is my opinion, at least.

[Praxus]

A call to action is not something of substance?

[HaloNoble6]

Sure it is, but the call you are making is to nuke some inanimate object, as if that's the source of the evil behind the acts of today.

[BurgessLau]

Nuke the Kabba. Plain and simple.

Your statement is very puzzling. First, what results would you expect to come from dropping a nuclear bomb on the Ka'bah? Second, does "plain and simple" mean no thought process is required to reach that conclusion?

[Spinnach]

I couldn't believe it when I heard it on the radio this morning on the way to work. London seemed like such a happy place yesterday when they won the 2012 Olympics. The other thing that baffles me is that I was the only one at work who had heard about it. No one even noticed. That gets me more than anything.

What is the time difference between the East Coast and London? Is it 5 hours?

Edit: I checked, it is 5 hours.

Edited July 7, 2005 by Spinnach

[Praxus]

 

Your statement is very puzzling. First, what results would you expect to come from dropping a nuclear bomb on the Ka'bah?

They would realize that they would pay heavily for their support of Militant Islam (since Saudi Arabia along with Iran is one of it's key supporters). Maybe the Ka'bah is not the best target.

Edit: I would add that it was driven by immediate anger, upon finding out what happened several minutes prior.

Second, does "plain and simple" mean no thought process is required to reach that conclusion? 

 

I meant no such thing.

Edited July 7, 2005 by Praxus

[The Wrath]

Saudi Arabia is hardly one of the key supporters of militant Islam. The Saudi government has arrested and killed dozens of Al Qaeda leaders and, as a result, Al Qaeda in Saudi Arabia is about to collapse, because something like 80% of its leadership positions have been filled by men under age 27. Even conservative Saudi clerics have come out and denounced violent jihad. While Saudi Arabia is certainly far from perfect, it is the best ally we have among the Arab world.

[HaloNoble6]

I think you've been listening too much to GOP talking points--quit watching Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity, Moose. Saudi money funds terrorism more than any other nation's money. Saudi money runs through the vast majority of the mosques here in the US, as well as the mosques and madrasas abroad. Look at Syria, Iran, and Egypt. You think they have the wealth to fund a worldwide network of terrorism and Islamic propaganda?

Consider the following from the Index of Economic Freedom 2005 conducted by the Heritage Foundation:

Saudi Arabia contains the world’s largest proven oil reserves, with over 260 billion barrels of oil—close to 26 percent of the world’s total. As the world’s foremost oil exporter, it plays a dominant role in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).

Sure they like to put on a show of fighting terrorism and such, but that's because it's the best cover for underhandedly funding the actual thing.

[Bill Thebert]

Does anyone believe (or has anyone heard any evidence to the effect) that these bombings were in any way related to the announcement of the location of the 2012 Olympics?

Speculation: Were these bad guys ready to go in Singapore, Moscow, New York (i.e., all other candidate cities) as well?

[The Wrath]

If there were reason to believe it was connected to the Olympics, we would have heard about it by now. There's no good reason why that would cause Al Qaeda to attack. For those of you who doubt the authenticity of Al Qaeda's claim, here's a post I made on another forum:

The Al Qaeda claim is actually very credible. First of all, the IRA always sends out advance notice that it will be conducting an attack, so it wouldn't be them. Secondly, experts are saying it has all the makings of an Al Qaeda attack. If the name of the group sounds a little fishy, consider that Al Zarqawi's group's full name is "Al Qaeda Group of Jihad Organization in the Land of Two Rivers." There are new terrorist groups popping up all the time, and most of them only exist long enough to committ one attack...then the members either disperse to do their own thing or they are assimilated into a larger group.

It makes perfect sense that it's Al Qaeda, given the Madrid bombings. If they want to hit U.S. allies in Iraq, what other European country would they hit? Spain pulled out already, so they wouldn't hit them again. Germany and France have both vehemently opposed the war in Iraq, so it wouldn't be them. Russia not only opposed the war, but it already has its own problem with Islamic terrorists. The Chechens have asked other Islamic groups to stay out of Russia, because they see it as their own war to fight.

Outside of Europe, you might have Japan and Australia, but both are too far away for Al Qaeda to worry about, while there are bigger fish to fry on the same land-mass. Neither one of them has a particularly large presence in Iraq anyway. London was the perfect target for Al Qaeda, and Blair is going to lose some serious support over this. I just hope he doesn't fold under the pressure, the way Spain did.

[The Wrath]

I think you've been listening too much to GOP talking points--quit watching Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity, Moose.  Saudi money funds terrorism more than any other nation's money.  Saudi money runs through the vast majority of the mosques here in the US, as well as the mosques and madrasas abroad.  Look at Syria, Iran, and Egypt.  You think they have the wealth to fund a worldwide network of terrorism and Islamic propaganda?

Consider the following from the Index of Economic Freedom 2005 conducted by the Heritage Foundation:

Sure they like to put on a show of fighting terrorism and such, but that's because it's the best cover for underhandedly funding the actual thing.

I watch O'Reilly on a fairly regular basis but I don't usually watch Hannity and Colmes, because I think they're both morons. I don't recall ever hearing O'Reilly talk about Saudi Arabia. I drew that conclusion based on the research I did for a presentation in my Global Terrorism class. I could have had bad sources, but several of them were government sources.

When you say that Saudi Arabia funds terrorism, do you mean Saudi people or the Saudi government? I don't know about the people, but I find it unlikely that the government funds Islamic terrorism, given Al Qaeda's stated objective of overthrowing the Saudi royal family.

[HaloNoble6]

Saudi people and friends of the Saudi family. I can't offhand get a direct source, but I'll look for one.

[Ariana Binetta]

I am sick of all these terrorist attacks. I agree, down with Syria and Iran (IRAN esp.). No more invasions, just bombings. Just destroy them, or just lots of mini nukes.

Short and sweet. Since the West is so bad at teaching and implanting freedom abroad, we should just devastate their tyrannical leaders and their high infastructure. But NO follow-up occupation. If a new dictatorship rises to replace the old, we should attack again. And so on. Let anyone who serves in the police, military, party, and government know that they are subject to overwhelming attack at our will. Especially the evil leaders--who should be systematically targeted.

[The Wrath]

But does the Saudi government support it? I think that's the real kicker. You probably know more about it than I do so, if you know some facts that point in that direction, I'll just defer to your knowledge. But from everything I saw, the Saudi government has been pretty diligent about trying to bring down Al Qaeda.

[The Wrath]

In defense of Bill O'Reilly, he just now listed Saudi Arabia as a country that allows terrorists to operate.

[EC]

Short and sweet.  Since the West is so bad at teaching and implanting freedom abroad, we should just devastate their tyrannical leaders and their high infastructure. But NO follow-up occupation. If a new dictatorship rises to replace the old, we should attack again. And so on. Let anyone who serves in the police, military, party, and government know that they are subject to overwhelming attack at our will. Especially the evil leaders--who should be systematically targeted.

Exactly my thinking on the subject. Maybe you're not so bad after all.

[DavidV]

Does anyone else find it disturbing that the AP feels that the phrase “terrorist attacks” should only be mentioned in a quote?