Link copied to clipboard
The London Bombings
A series of bombs rocked central London at the height of rush hour today, in the subway system, on a double-decker bus. At least four explosions. As many as 700 hundred hurt, 37 dead as of this evening, our time. The toll is expected to rise. From the G-8 summit Prime Minister Tony Blair says it is "reasonably clear" that terrorism is to blame for the "barbaric" blasts. AP main story here.
"Everyone started running and screaming" -- Guardian readers' eyewitness accounts here. For the Guardian's news blog, here. The paper's front page, here. Its audio report from the G8 summit, here.
For the BBC's coverage, here. The Daily Telegraph here.
An impressive Wikipedia entry on the bombings has already taken shape.
Germany's Der Spiegel reports Al Qaida claims responsibility. The magazine's Web site has this:
A double-decker bus at Tavistock Place had its roof blown completely open by a violent explosion and there were a number of explosions on the London tube as well -- including incidents at Aldgate, Edgware Road, King's Cross, Old Street and Russell Square, and Liverpool Street stations.
The blasts, which were early on blamed on a possible power surge on the London grid, have now been claimed by the terrorist group al-Qaida according to a document posted on Web site often used by the group to announce attacks. A group calling itself "Secret Organization -- al Qaida in Europe" says it was responsible and says it was a reaction to British participation in military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. The authenticity of the claim could not immediately be verified.
In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate, may peace be upon the cheerful one and undaunted fighter, Prophet Muhammad, God's peace be upon him.
Nation of Islam and Arab nation: Rejoice for it is time to take revenge against the British Zionist Crusader government in retaliation for the massacres Britain is committing in Iraq and Afghanistan. The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern, and western quarters.
We have repeatedly warned the British Government and people. We have fulfilled our promise and carried out our blessed military raid in Britain after our mujahideen exerted strenuous efforts over a long period of time to ensure the success of the raid.
We continue to warn the governments of Denmark and Italy and all the Crusader governments that they will be punished in the same way if they do not withdraw their troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. He who warns is excused.
God says: 'You who believe: If ye will aid (the cause of) Allah, He will aid you, and plant your feet firmly.' Story here.
Blogwise, you can read what people are writing on the London Underground Tube site. The Londonist has coverage.
The British Bloggerheads site is busy grabbing pictures, audio, news and opinion.
Europhobia is as well.
Tim Worstall has gathered samples of blog opinion from across England and beyond.
Among The Wibbler's posts is this note of empathy from a New Yorker named Maria. "Our hearthfelt condolences to the people of London and the UK. We New Yorkers know how horrible is the feeling brought up by an attack. We hope the people hurt recover soon and those involved in the planning of this monstruosity pay before the courts. Again, our thoughts are with you. London will show the world what a great city is, recovering from this tragedy and standing tall."
blankin' terrorists. That's why things like Guantanomo Bay don't bother me. Tougher interrogations the better. I mean are we supposed to play by Marques of Queensberry rules while...Makes no sense, Dan. Guess the only good to come out of it is to see Tony Blair speak. Is that guy eloquent or whattt? And then Bush comes to the plate almost as if he's searching (very slowly) for words out of thin air. Embarassing. It's like Shakespeare next to sidekick Huck Finn. Can Tony be President? Have an early vote BS, Before Schwartzneggar.
Also check out coverage here: http://www.jacobsen.no/anders/blog/
We need to eradicate the terrorists as well as the useful idiots who help them (knowingly or not)
We need to eradicate the terrorists as well as the useful idiots who help them (knowingly or not)
I have this picture in my head of the newsreels from WWII of the London housewives calmly sitting in the underground with their knitting while the Germans bombed overhead. Stiff upper lip cliches aside, it's going to take more than this to intimidate the English. On a totally inappropriate note, have anyone checked in with Madonna and Gwyneth to see if they're ready to move back to the US yet? HA
It's safe to assume that we all agree that the acts in London were evil and carried out by a sinister force. I consider it evil anytime civilians are killed, and I would love to see Al-Quaeda eradicated. But I find the terminology a little Orwellian. Killing 33 people in London is an "act of terror", but what we are doing is considered "liberation", despite the fact that we have killed over 20,000 civilians in Iraq? Just because CNN is allowed to cover the despicable acts in London doesn't make it any less horrific than the terror faced on a daily basis by our soldiers and the citizens of Iraq.
BTW, I should have said "has anyone checked in with Madonna and Gwyneth. . . " sted "have" Positions are still available on the Citizen Mom copy desk.
Good point. Let's do a survey about Gitmo and Abu Graib today.
johnny, if you don't understand the difference between those acts in London and what we are doing for the Iraqis, Lord help you. We put ourselves in harm's way b/c we don't want to kill innocent civilians. Your comment is ignorant and insulting.
"Killing 33 people in London is an "act of terror", but what we are doing is considered "liberation", despite the fact that we have killed over 20,000 civilians in Iraq?" Attacking a public transit system full of civilians is terrorism. Attacking a country and accidentally or unknowingly killing their civilians is a little different. I'm sure the members of our beloved armed services didn't play games like "Whoever kills the most civilians gets free lunch". I'm not any more pleased with the war than you are, but that statement didn't make sense to me.
// Killing 33 people in London is an "act of terror", but what we are doing is considered "liberation", despite the fact that we have killed over 20,000 civilians in Iraq? // That's just silly. We all know that brown people don't count.
Wait until suicide bombers start showing up on Septa and I'd bet Johnny will start seeing the difference.
"Wait until suicide bombers start showing up on Septa and I'd bet Johnny will start seeing the difference." Yeah it's scary, my mom will probably call tonight and tell me to get another job... :)
"johnny, your comment is insulting and ignorant" -Really? It's ignorant for me to think that killing someone's father, or mother, or child is wrong, regardless of which side does it, or what it's in the name of? As for "accidentally or unknowingly" killing their citizens: do you think our administration, when it decided to invade another country, didn't think that there would be civilian casualties?
Ok, you are not ignorant. You have the knowledge necessary to make the distinction between killing civilians for the sake of killing civilians and accidently killing civilians when trying to rid a country of Ba'thists and terrorists terrorizing Iraqi civilians. However, you still fail to make that distinction. I was giving you credit when I said "ignorant". I take that back.
Jason, I only just got on this post and I definetely hope you're joking when you say that brown people don't count. Because, if you are, then **** you.
Jason, I only just got on this post and I definetely hope you're joking when you say that brown people don't count. Because, if you are, then **** you.
Sorry Jason, I read the posts wrong. I meant Rising Sun
Jason, I only just got on this post and I definetely hope you're joking when you say that brown people don't count. Because, if you are, then **** you.
"do you think our administration didn't think that there would be civilian casualties?" yeah right before they announced that we were going to war with the civilian population of Iraq, and if we kill the bad guys or catch Saddam it's a bonus.
It's OK Trino :)
Just some simple sarcasm, Trino. It's my way of preparing for weeks of flag waving, 9/11 references, and speeches about how the terrorists hate our freedom.
just want to say that al q.... whatever the name of these people are, they are sick!!!! how the f*ck can you kill innocent f*cking people, and just expect everyone to go on with there ordinary lives! Its not possible, my best mates dad f*cking died cuz of them!!!!! can you please imagine what he's feeling!!!! if your gonna kill people, show a little god damn respect
Its cool Rising Sun.
Its cool Rising Sun.
This morning my world was hunky dory. We have a visitor from England and naturally we are all distraught. My guess is that the London police is full of the most excellent and most capable people who I hope will find the murderers and put them behind bars for good, where they can think about their crimes for a long long time, and only good can come from it after that, unlike when we lower ourselves to their level and use judicial killing, like in the USA, where nothing good can come. If it was arab people who murder for political gain, my guess is they will be caught. If it was western covert-ops, we will never find anyone, or arrest the wrong ones..and let them go later when we all forgot.. like in MADRID SPAIN BOMBINGS.. where 200 people were killed... and to this day we have not locked up the actual murderers. My sincere hope is that civil society in England is still much stronger than the perpetrators calculated with and, that's my sincere hope, the great honest London Police will actually arrest covert-ops, and expose them, like the New Zealanders did with the french Rainbow Warrior bombers. And this will be the last of it. BLAIR STATEMENT: "We know that these people act in the name of Islam" well.. fuck yeah, thats what they do. Remember that previous Al Qaeda CREDIT CLAIMS have included the famous Al-Masri Brigades claiming credit for causing the power outage in the USA East Coast and Canada, yet, even when this was fulwell known, most Newspapers chose to NOT MENTION this.
Oh, i forgot. For a brutal video of the lovely happenings in newly democratic Iraq, please watch this GERMAN TV (engl subtitles) Documentary, and enjoy the shitslinging in the comments. http://thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3353103
We need to stop terrorists whenever we can, but ultimately they are the symptom . . . What is the disease? "Why are they so pissed off?" We are creating terrorists now faster than we can kill them, and I suspect this trend will continue to accelerate.
"// Killing 33 people in London is an "act of terror", but what we are doing is considered "liberation", despite the fact that we have killed over 20,000 civilians in Iraq? //" this is like 3rd grade logic. If you can't see the difference I guess that puts you in the Useful Idiots file for AQ.
Speaking of third grade, I usually settled arguments then by making personal attacks on the person I disagreed with instead of offering a rational argument for my cause. I grew out of that, but apparently some people haven't. If you're going to resort to name calling, that's fine, but at least offer some sort of argument for your stance. The "uh, I don't like what you said, so you're stupid" philosophy, especially when it's backed up with absolutely nothing, is kind of pathetic.
I'm rubber and you're glue....
guys: chill. there is no comparison between the 'war in Iraq' and what happened in London. (But if you want to get really detailed the difference might be examined between said thousands who have been killed out of what has -in the above- been established as indifference: part of achieving a greater goal and those 50 killed in a specific, desperate political message... perhaps against what governs said indifference?) Seriously: to be unable to sympathise with the people who've done this sh*t is un-human and must contradict any feeling that what they've done is wrong. I don't suggest you sympathise with their MEANS in the SLIGHTEST, but hey: with such extremes SURELY there must be something behind it. And guys: noone is an 'innocent civillian' in war. PARTICULARLY not in a country where people are EXPECTED to influence the establishment. I'm not trying to justify anything, (murder for any cause is unjustifiable) but ...it's a perspective?
Bombing London didn't work for Germany in WWII and it won't work for radical islams in 2005. I hope our response is nasty. I think it is time for Syria to get a taste of our armed forces. We have to make somebody pay for this, might as well be Syria.
no coments
features of russian secret services r detected
the key: the charcoal from Charring cross
8:51 and virus H5N1 attack is planed
GRU used R HeSS image in Pegout exhibition HSM Vilnius
I think we should set up a "wheel of misfortune". That way, whenever terrorists attack, instead of taking the time to come up with a comprehensive response against the actual aggressors, we can just "take a spin" and start bombing whatever country the wheel lands on. It's more or less what we did with Iraq, why not do it again?
What kind of response do you expect to get from that post, Johnny? Certainly not an intellectual one. Are you egging people on? Join the conversation.
I was responding to the "let's bomb Syria" post, though I'm not sure if "my country..." is being sarcastic or not. I'm assuming so. By joining the conversation, do you mean, "Be a good German, and go with the flow"? If we all just sat around agreeing with each other, this comment section (and this country, for that matter) would be pretty boring. As for intellectual responses, I'm still waiting for one for my "orwellian doublespeak" comment, but so far have received just some name calling and no good arguments.
By "join the conversation", I mean don't make rediculous comments that a 12 year old would make. But you have little to no argument on the "orwellian doublespeak". I like to use analogies. Consider a hockey game, a fight breaks out, a punch is thrown, the guy ducks, and he hits the ref standing behind the intended recipient. Does that fit your idea of "civilians" or "innocent bystander"? Now, you're the ref. Aside from what a judge or league official might rule, are you mad at the guy that threw the punch? It might be a relevant analogy, if you think it through and don't attack it right away by saying stuff like "Does the ref live?!" or "It's hockey not war". Just use your imagination. It's all in the intentions. The guy meant to hit the other hockey player, but hit the ref instead. Or another hockey analogy, a ref or fan gets hit by a puck really hard. Clearly a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. And the player definitely didn't mean to hit whoever he did. I just don't see how you can think terrorism is the same (or close enough) to war. Please enlighten me. And I have never called you names, but I haven't been light on you either, so I'm sorry. I'm a fan of Socrates so I always use analogies. Read Plato sometime, you'll understand.
I'm not being sarcastic. I feel that certain countries bear a strong responsibility for the current wave of radical islam. When dictatorships teach hate, those countries need to be held accountable. Yes, I think we should bomb Syria, I think we should take over the whole country. And, if the terrorism continues, I think we need to attack Saudi Arabia and Iran, and eventually Pakistan. I don't know everything, just a little bit of history. And, I feel the actions of the radical islams needs to be countered very strongly. We need to stand up and fight. This is different than spinning a wheel blindly to decide who to kill. This type of activity cannot be tolerated and talked about. We need to show some serious force, to make these kids understand that we are seriously going to kill them and their families for their crimes. The life of a country is something that is very delicate, and the life of our country is being defended in Iraq and elsewhere. It's not pretty, it's sick, I know, but that is how a country survives. Just visit Washington Square, plenty of dead soldiers buried there, and we were just fighting the Brits. Think about it, long and hard.
Trust me, I have thought about it, long and hard. Your analogy to Washington Square is irelevant. In that war, we were the country that was attacked by a colonial empire. In this war, we are the attacking colonial empire. Sure, we all wish Syria wasn't so militant, but bombing them is simply impractical, because we can't afford to do it after making such a huge mistake in Ira. There are dozens of countries out there who have poorly run governments. Are we just going to bomb every one of them? I enjoyed the analogy, Jason, and I understand your point. I know that the difference is that they are attempting to kill civilians, and we, supposedly, are not. In your analogy, I suppose the players are the soldiers. That's why it's a little off. I am not blaming our soldiers for killing civilians. I am blaming our elected officials for putting them in the position to kill civilians (and to be killed, for that matter) in a completely needless war.
Somewhat valid point. You can view the analogy as our administration fighting Iraq. They don't pull the trigger, but they punch the ref by accident! It starts at the intelligence, the top are advised, they make decisions, give orders, and eventually our soldiers are killing Iraqis, down the chain of command. Obviously, our army can't just go to war without getting orders. The analogy doesn't assume why the players got in a fight, if their cause was good, etc. Just that they fought. The other part of the argument probably needs something else. The crux of your argument is that the war is needless. Needless war, nobody sent, nobody killed. I know a lot of the evidence, but I'm reluctant to say I'm completely convinced that it was needless, so that's our basis for disagreement. Until I change my idea about that or you change, we can't agree. End of argument :)
Come on, we Americans mean well. We REALLY want democracy, the limited type where the great un-washed cannot really decide. The type where the elites, the educated, the best men can decide whats good for all of us. The brown people are just not up to that level yet... just as most people in the USA. Our Joint Chiefs of Staff simple HAD TO remote.control the airplanes into the WTC and make it look like arabs... otherwise the evil Dictator Saddam and other socialist destructors of private property would have felt encouraged to destroy the carefully planned world-financial system with their socialist EURO fantasies... Come on, get real.