PDA

View Full Version : Terroism in London? 4 BLASTS CAUSE CHAOS IN LONDON; TRANSPORTION SYSTEM SHUT


Taco John
07-07-2005, 06:44 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41277000/jpg/_41277449_bus_close_reader.jpg

Taco John
07-07-2005, 06:46 AM
Tony Blair: it’s terrorism
By FT reporters
Published: July 7 2005 09:48 | Last updated: July 7 2005 13:26

Multiple explosions on the London Underground and on at least one bus have killed two and left dozens with “terrible injuries” in what prime minister Tony Blair said was a co-ordinated terrorist attack timed to coincide with the G8 summit.


Mr Blair, speaking in Gleneagles, described the attack as “barbaric” but said the summit would continue. The prime minister is flying to the capital for a full briefing but will return to Scotland this evening.

“It’s reasonably clear there has been a series of terrorist attacks in London. Obviously there are casualties - both people who have died and people who are seriously injured,” he said.

A group calling itself the al Qaeda Organization in Europe claimed responsibility for the attacks and warned Italy and Denmark to withdraw troops from Iraq and Afghanistan in a statement posted on Islamist web site al-Saha.

Police said there were at least two deaths and up to 185 casualties. The first of the explosions was reported at 8.49am at Aldgate East tube station. Six other incidents were reported at Edgware Road station, King’s Cross, Old Street, Moorgate, Russell Square and Leicester Square.

The Metropolitan Police also confirmed there had been an explosion on at least one bus in Tavistock Square minutes after the blasts on the Underground.

“I saw lots of people running up a road and then saw the top of a bus destroyed,” an eyewitness told Sky News.

Early suggestions that the explosions may have been caused by an accidental power surge quickly gave way to evidence pointing to deliberate sabotage, amounting to the most serious terrorist attack in Europe since the attacks on the Madrid railway system in March last year.

Passengers spoke of hearing a “huge thud’’at Edgware Road station and travellers emerged from tunnels covered in blood and soot and with torn clothing.

An eyewitness at Aldgate East, where the two fatalities occurred, saw smoke rising from the station and commuters with facial injuries and burns leaving as the area was evacuated. Police officers at the scene said there was evidence of an explosive device 200 metres down the track from the station.

The explosions shattered the euphoria generated by London’s successful bid for the Olympics and the renewed sense of national self-confidence.

Shares on the FTSE 100 fell as much as 2.8 per cent - the biggest single day fall since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the US - before halving their losses by early afternoon. The stock exchange eased rules on marketmakers after several trading floors were evacuated.

Across Europe, equity markets tumbled, while in the US, futures trade suggested the Dow Jones Industrial Average could fall by as much as 200 points at the Wall Street open. Oil prices tumbled 6.7 per cent as traders bet that the terrorist attacks in London would prompted a slowdown in economic growth.

The explosion, during the peak rush hour, caused massive disruption for commuters. Streets around the capital were packed with people attempting to find other ways of getting to work and mobile networks were jammed as people attempted to call their families and colleagues. The Underground network normally handles more than 3m passenger journeys a day.

Mr Blair, looking pale and strained, said the leaders of the G8 were united in their shock and sympathy over the attacks and would continue with their agenda of addressing African debt and global warming.

“It is important, however, that those engaged in terrorism realise that our determination to defend our values and our way of life is greater than their determination to cause death and destruction to innocent people in a desire impose extremism on the world,” he said.

Taco John
07-07-2005, 06:47 AM
Main points



- Two killed and up to 185 injured

- At least four explosions confirmed

- Al Qaeda-linked group claims responsibility

- Underground and bus services suspended across the capital

- Shares on FTSE 100 fall as much as 2.8 per cent

- Blair to return to London but G8 summit will continue

cdcox
07-07-2005, 06:52 AM
My condolences to the families of the victims and the people of London. This is a real shame. London is such a vibrant city and the Underground is one of the strongest symbols of the city, in addition to being the main means of trasportation. The blasts occured on a stretch of the Underground between Russell Square and King's Cross station. The hotel that I stay at in London is in Russell Square, but I've only taken the route ton King's Cross Station a couple of times. Still it is a little unsettling.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 07:27 AM
Unfortunately, GB has been in this from the beginning.

It's gonna take an attack on Paris, or Berlin, to get the rest of Europe off their collective asses and realize that EVERYONE is a target.

Garcia Bronco
07-07-2005, 07:31 AM
I heard 7 blasts

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 07:35 AM
I heard 7 blasts

Apparently, Blair mentioned 7 blasts...

Herzig
07-07-2005, 07:36 AM
Unfortunately, GB has been in this from the beginning.

It's gonna take an attack on Paris, or Berlin, to get the rest of Europe off their collective asses and realize that EVERYONE is a target.

So it would have been "fortunate" if they hadn't been in this from the beginning? That's a pretty fu@ked up statement there Parker.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 07:39 AM
So it would have been "fortunate" if they hadn't been in this from the beginning? That's a pretty fu@ked up statement there Parker.

No, I'm saying these idiot terrorists aren't going to target somebody that they know will drag others into the fray. They're going to continue attacking us and Great Britain, because they know that the French and Germans will continue to stay out of it.

Donger
07-07-2005, 07:40 AM
They are now saying at least 40 dead.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 07:40 AM
In other words, it's unfortunate for GB that they've been involved from the beginning.

It would have been "fortunate" for them if they hadn't, because this may have never happened.

Goapics1
07-07-2005, 07:40 AM
They are now saying at least 40 dead.
.....................and 300 injured.

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 07:43 AM
First. I extend my condolences to those British that were wounded and affected.

2nd. I last heard it was likely 4 locations, with 7 explosions.

3rd. I hope this pisses the British people off enough to steel their resolve. I don't see them folding like the Spanish did.

ExtremeChief
07-07-2005, 07:49 AM
If it wasn't Iraq and Afghanistan, it would be something else. Terrorists can and will find a reason to attack, it's what they do. In their mind, if you aren't doing exactly what they do, you are an infindel, and need to be eliminated. The only way to end terrorist attacks is to eliminate the terrorists.

wasi
07-07-2005, 07:52 AM
Unfortunately, GB has been in this from the beginning.

It's gonna take an attack on Paris, or Berlin, to get the rest of Europe off their collective asses and realize that EVERYONE is a target.

I'm assuming you mean the War on Terror?
Have you already forgotten about the bombings in Spain last year? Spain is in Europe? Spain has also been "in this" since the beginning. Now, in your statement.. I think your confusing two very different things.

There is the War on Terror, which Europe collectively (and most of the world for that matter-even Canada) is very much behind.
Then there is the War in Iraq, which most of Europe is not behind. No attack on Paris or Berlin will get Europe collectively into the fight in Iraq. That is what it sounds like you are saying.

HemiEd
07-07-2005, 07:54 AM
What a shame, fugging cowards. Killing innocent people is pathetic, chickenshit bastards.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 07:58 AM
I'm assuming you mean the War on Terror?
Have you already forgotten about the bombings in Spain last year? Spain is in Europe? Spain has also been "in this" since the beginning. Now, in your statement.. I think your confusing two very different things.

There is the War on Terror, which Europe collectively (and most of the world for that matter-even Canada) is very much behind.
Then there is the War in Iraq, which most of Europe is not behind. No attack on Paris or Berlin will get Europe collectively into the fight in Iraq. That is what it sounds like you are saying.

Sorry, but the "war" collectively is not 2 different things. I have friends in Germany that I still maintain contact with. They are not behind ANY war of any kind, and they don't separate the war on terror from the war in Iraq in any way. However, they have said repeatedly that if their country were attacked, they might feel differently.

bringbackmarty
07-07-2005, 08:04 AM
First. I extend my condolences to those British that were wounded and affected.

2nd. I last heard it was likely 4 locations, with 7 explosions.

3rd. I hope this pisses the British people off enough to steel their resolve. I don't see them folding like the Spanish did.
Maybe it was like this...
one on the bus.
two at each of the three remaining locations, timed to get the people running a certain direction, then another to blow them up. That is a hamas type technique.

MOhillbilly
07-07-2005, 08:06 AM
However, they have said repeatedly that if their country were attacked, they might feel differently.
Ironic

wasi
07-07-2005, 08:07 AM
Sorry, but the "war" collectively is not 2 different things. I have friends in Germany that I still maintain contact with. They are not behind ANY war of any kind, and they don't separate the war on terror from the war in Iraq in any way. However, they have said repeatedly that if their country were attacked, they might feel differently.

IMO the War on Terror is very much separate from the War in Iraq.
One is supported by the UN, the other is not.

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 08:08 AM
I'm assuming you mean the War on Terror?
Have you already forgotten about the bombings in Spain last year? Spain is in Europe? Spain has also been "in this" since the beginning. Now, in your statement.. I think your confusing two very different things.

There is the War on Terror, which Europe collectively (and most of the world for that matter-even Canada) is very much behind.
Then there is the War in Iraq, which most of Europe is not behind. No attack on Paris or Berlin will get Europe collectively into the fight in Iraq. That is what it sounds like you are saying.

You sound like a French Canadian.....the UN is full of cowardly Douchebags who can eat mah ass. I wish the UN would move to, and be funded by Europe.

My brother is in bagdad right now, and is fighting forein Terrorists regularly. If they weren't in Bagdad, Ramadi, Tikrit, Hit et al, they'd just as likely be trying to pull their psycho, twisted pigfelcher crap somewhere else.

The Only cured terrorist is one being eaten by buzzards.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 08:09 AM
IMO the War on Terror is very much separate from the War in Iraq.
One is supported by the UN, the other is not.

This isn't a political discussion, sorry.

Coach
07-07-2005, 08:09 AM
3rd. I hope this pisses the British people off enough to steel their resolve. I don't see them folding like the Spanish did.

Please expand. Because the Spanish pulled out of Iraq, they have no resolve on terror? Another feeble attempt to connect the war in Iraq with the war against al Qaeda?

Just am curious, sir Iowanian.

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 08:12 AM
Riddle me this Coach.

Spain had troops in Iraq.
Spain subway is blown up, and terrorists threaten them.
Spainish people elect man who days before had zero chance because he says he'll pull their troops out.....
Spain Pulls troops from Iraq, cowers in Bunker at home.

Where am I missing the boat?
Spain was hit in the Chin and folded like a wet napkin.

chris
07-07-2005, 08:13 AM
My brother is in bagdad right now, and is fighting forein Terrorists regularly. If they weren't in Bagdad, Ramadi, Tikrit, Hit et al, they'd just as likely be trying to pull their psycho, twisted pigfelcher crap somewhere else.

The Only cured terrorist is one being eaten by buzzards.

Rep.

I'm always amazed at these naive comments that Iraq and the WOT are separate.

The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist. So smack them until the gophers don't pop up anymore.

Hope your brother stays safe.

Donger
07-07-2005, 08:14 AM
IMO the War on Terror is very much separate from the War in Iraq.
One is supported by the UN, the other is not.

What absolute nonsense. While it is arguable that Iraq was not originally part of the War on Terror (compared to Afghanistan), it sure as hell is now.

Coach
07-07-2005, 08:15 AM
Riddle me this Coach.

Spain had troops in Iraq.
Spain subway is blown up, and terrorists threaten them.
Spainish people elect man who days before had zero chance because he says he'll pull their troops out.....
Spain Pulls troops from Iraq, cowers in Bunker at home.

Where am I missing the boat?
Spain was hit in the Chin and folded like a wet napkin.

Ah, makes sense now. Thanks.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 08:15 AM
Please expand. Because the Spanish pulled out of Iraq, they have no resolve on terror? Another feeble attempt to connect the war in Iraq with the war against al Qaeda?

Just am curious, sir Iowanian.

Even the enemy says you're an idiot.

The statement said Islam and "Arabism" could "rejoice for it is time to take revenge from the British Zionist Crusader government in retaliation for the massacres Britain is committing in Iraq and Afghanistan."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/07/explosions.claim/index.html

There is no feeble ATTEMPT to connect the two. The two are connected, inexorably, whether the Bush haters want to acknowledge it or not.

Saulbadguy
07-07-2005, 08:18 AM
Part of the War on Iraq is seperate from the WOT. Part of it is not. Rebuilding Iraq has nothing to do with WOT. However, killing terrorists and whatnot in Iraq IS part of the WOT.

Iraq is just a theater for the world-wide war on terror. Same with Afghanistan. We aren't in Iraq and Afghanistan "Just to kill terrorists".

beavis
07-07-2005, 08:26 AM
It's gonna take an attack on Paris, or Berlin, to get the rest of Europe off their collective asses and realize that EVERYONE is a target.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that if it did happen, they'd just blame us.

wasi
07-07-2005, 08:27 AM
[QUOTE=chris]Rep.
I'm always amazed at these naive comments that Iraq and the WOT are separate.
QUOTE]

Actually, being amazing by these comments that they are separate issues really makes you naive because you have completely disregarded issues of international relations. Internationally, the War on Terror is supported (by the UN) because it is evil and in everyone's best interest to see it stopped. On the issue of Iraq, well not everyone agrees.

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 08:29 AM
what in the hell are the "internationals" actually DOING for the WoT, in any theater, not currently soaking up American Blood in the soil?

From what I can tell, canada is doing about as much as a Brigade of IceCapade Dancers. The Cast of Sesame Street Live has done more to help the US than canada as far as I can tell.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 08:32 AM
[QUOTE=chris]Rep.
I'm always amazed at these naive comments that Iraq and the WOT are separate.
QUOTE]

Actually, being amazing by these comments that they are separate issues really makes you naive because you have completely disregarded issues of international relations. Internationally, the War on Terror is supported (by the UN) because it is evil and in everyone's best interest to see it stopped. On the issue of Iraq, well not everyone agrees.

My German friends don't agree with you. The WoT and Iraq are both wars of American aggression according to them.

Rain Man
07-07-2005, 08:35 AM
My German friends don't agree with you. The WoT and Iraq are both wars of American aggression according to them.


Germany has a history of bad decision-making when it comes to wars, though.


I presume that the London bombs were just planted rather than a suicide bomber, right? I haven't heard.

Donger
07-07-2005, 08:37 AM
I presume that the London bombs were just planted rather than a suicide bomber, right? I haven't heard.

They haven't ascertained that yet.

wasi
07-07-2005, 08:39 AM
what in the hell are the "internationals" actually DOING for the WoT, in any theater, not currently soaking up American Blood in the soil?

From what I can tell, canada is doing about as much as a Brigade of IceCapade Dancers. The Cast of Sesame Street Live has done more to help the US than canada as far as I can tell.

Canada has troops in Afganistan for example. Next to the military commitment by America, sure this Canadian contribution of sheer numbers of troops might appear small or insignificant. But Canada has done much in intelligence matters. We have reformed our own version of the FBI and begun to share much more information across the border.
However, Canada does not have the material to contribute more military. Our armed forces are at half of what they should be, hindering a larger military presence. Military spending was increased in the last budget but not by very much, instead the government spent money on housing and other societial issues we have here.

chris
07-07-2005, 08:43 AM
[QUOTE=chris]Rep.
I'm always amazed at these naive comments that Iraq and the WOT are separate.
QUOTE]

Actually, being amazing by these comments that they are separate issues really makes you naive because you have completely disregarded issues of international relations. Internationally, the War on Terror is supported (by the UN) because it is evil and in everyone's best interest to see it stopped. On the issue of Iraq, well not everyone agrees.

Amazing...I was in Toronto again several weeks ago and almost EVERYONE that I spoke with had this silly notion that putting our heads in the sand will make the WOT go away.

What I also loved was that the locals didn't want the missile defense, yet were concerned about nukes in NKorea.

Lets go down the list about whose blood was/is shed on behalf of the world:

WW1..WW2..Korea..PGW1..Bosnia..Somelia..PGW2..WOT

chris
07-07-2005, 08:47 AM
My German friends don't agree with you. The WoT and Iraq are both wars of American aggression according to them.

My girlfriend was in Berlin last week and had dinner with a large group of natives.

For once, the focus wasn't the war hungry Americans, but the fact that they are upset that global economic pressure could ruin their "cradle to grave" social net.

And it was the USA and China's fault for forcing people to work too hard!! :ROFL:

Sparhawk
07-07-2005, 08:51 AM
Osama needs to die, as does several of the other organizers. Our young people in Afghanistan and Iraq are giving their lives daily, while Bush whines not enough young people are joining the armed services. Is a draft going to be initiated? I think so, this entire mess is dragging out way too long. As a parent, I'm concerned. As a citizen of the Best Nation in the World, I'm angered

Lzen
07-07-2005, 08:52 AM
Terrorists Strike London With Series of Blasts
Thursday, July 07, 2005


PHOTOS VIDEO PHOTO ESSAYS


Click image to enlarge
Photo Essays:

Blasts Rock London
STORIES LINKS

Report: Islamic Group Claims London Blasts

Blair Returns to London After Blasts

U.S. Cities Heighten Transit Security

Witnesses Describe London Blasts

Blasts Shock London Olympic Team

Stock Futures Plunge on U.K. Blasts

Israeli Minister Denies Scotland Yard Warning
LONDON — A series of explosions struck London's public transportation system Thursday in what Prime Minister Tony Blair (search) called a coordinated series of "barbaric" terrorist attacks, most likely to coincide with the opening of the G-8 summit in nearby Scotland.

At least 40 people were reported dead and at least 300 others were wounded, according to U.S. officials and London hospitals.

After several hours during which public officials cautioned against reaching conclusions about what caused at least seven blasts on subways and buses, Blair gave a brief televised address where he concluded it was a terrorist action.

"It's important, however, that those engaged in terrorism realize that our determination to defend our values and our way of life is greater than their determination to cause death and destruction to innocent people and a desire to impose extremism on the world," an emotional Blair told the world.

"Whatever they do, it is our determination that they will never succeed destroying what we hold dear in this country and in other civilizations in the world."

G-8 leaders later condemned the attacks.

At least two people were killed and nine injured in the nearly simultaneous blasts, and officials shut down the entire underground transport network. Hospital officials said they are treating about 190 people for injuries relating to the blasts. Police said they believe there may be a "number of" fatalities.

"There have been a number of dreadful incidents across London today," said Home Secretary Charles Clarke (search), Britain's top law enforcement officer. He said there were "terrible injuries."

The U.S. State Department said there are no reports yet of Americans hurt in the blasts, but officials cautioned that information is very preliminary and hard to come by with communication outages.

The State Department has set up a task force and call center to deal with concerns of those with relatives and friends in London. The number is 1-888-407-4747.

Unknown Terror Group Claims Responsibility

A previously unknown group, "Secret Group of Al Qaeda's Jihad in Europe," claimed responsibility in the name of Al Qaeda for the blasts, saying they were in retaliation for Britain's involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. The group claimed the attack in a Web site posting and warned Italy and Denmark to withdraw troops from those two countries. Arabic satellite station Al Jazeera also reported that it had received a phone call from the group claiming responsibility.

The claim could not be verified.

A statement from the group was published on a Web site popular with Islamic militants.

"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, which was 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."

An explosion destroyed a double-decker bus near Russell Square not long after several blasts were reported on London subways, police said. A witness said the entire top deck of the bus was destroyed.

"I was on the bus in front and heard an incredible bang, I turned round and half the double-decker bus was in the air," Belinda Seabrook told Press Association, the British news agency.

She said the bus was packed with people.

"It was a massive explosion and there were papers and half a bus flying through the air," she said.

One Sky News reporter in Russell Square reported that "body after body" is being pulled from the Russell Square tube station as ambulances show up. Doctors apparently are wandering around in orange suits going into the tube tunnels. Some of the wounded are exiting the station covered in silver blankets; many stretchers are being carried out.

One witness, Darren Hall, said some passengers emerging from an evacuated subway station had soot and blood on their faces. He told BBC TV that he was evacuated along with others near the major King's Cross station and only afterward heard a blast.

One Sky News reporter covering Scotland Yard said sources told him there are indications that one bus explosion was caused by a homicide bomber.

Officials shut down the entire underground network after the explosions. Initial reports blamed a power surge.

The attacks came a day after London was awarded the 2012 Olympics (search) and as the G-8 summit (search) was getting underway in Scotland.

A spokesman for the Olympic committee said it still has full "full confidence" in London as the host of the 2012 Games.

London Mayor Ken Livingstone said: "I want to say one thing, specifically to the world today — this was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful, it was not aimed at presidents or prime ministers, it was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian ... young and old … that isn't an ideology, it isn't even a perverted fate, it is an indiscriminate attempt at mass murder."

"They seek to divide London, they seek Londoners to turn against each other ... this city of London is the greatest in the world because everybody lives side by side in harmony. Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack."

Livingstone also had words specifically for the terrorists: "I know that you personally do not fear to give your own life in exchange to taking others ... but I know you do fear you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society ... in the days that follow, look at our airports, look at our seaports and look at our railway stations ... you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world, will arrive in London to become Londoners, to fulfill their dream and achieve their potential … whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail."

G-8 Leaders Stand United Against Terrorism

Blair, who was hosting the world's most powerful industrial leaders at Gleneagles, Scotland, said he would leave the G-8 summit for awhile to meet with police and other officials but said the rest of the leaders would remain. The G-8 gathering is focusing on climate change and aid for Africa — but Iraq has largely been left off the agenda.

"Each of the countries around that [G-8] table have experience with the effects of terrorism and all of the leaders ... share our complete resolution to defeat this terrorism," Blair said in his address Thursday.

"It's particularly barbaric this has happened on a day when people are meeting to try to help the problems of poverty in Africa, the long-term problems of climate change and the environment," he said.

The G-8 leaders later issued a statement of their own regarding the attacks. Blair, flanked by President George Bush on one side and French President Jacques Chirac on the other, read the statement on a stage full of the other G-8 leaders in a sign of solidarity.

"Those responsible have no respect for human life. We are united in our resolve to confront and defeat this terrorism that is not an attack on one nation but on all nations and on civilized people everywhere. We will not allow violence to change our societies or our values, nor will we allow it to stop the work of this summit," the statement read.

"The terrorists will not succeed. Today's bombings will not weaken in any way our resolve to uphold the most deeply held principles of our societies and to defeat those who would impose their fanaticism and extremism on all of us. We shall prevail and they shall not."

Bush later told reporters that the people of London have America's "heartfelt condolences" and said he appreciates Blair's steadfast determination and strength.

"He'll carry a message of solidarity with him" as he leaves the G-8 summit for London, Bush added. "I was most impressed by the resolve of all the [G-8] leaders in the room and that their resolve is as strong as my resolve. ... We will not yield to the terrorists. We will find them; we will bring them to justice."

Bush said there's a clear contrast between the work being done at the G-8 summit to eradicate AIDS and clean up the environment and the attacks and the goals of the terrorists responsible, "those who've got such evil in their heart that they will take the lives of innocent folks."

"The War on Terror goes on," he added.

Liz Kirkham, spokeswoman for Tayside Police Force, which covers the Gleneagles area, said no additional security precautions were being taken at the summit as a result of the blasts, as substantial measures had already been put in place.

NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer also released a statement, calling the attacks "appalling."

"I know I speak on behalf of all NATO allies when I express our sympathy for and solidarity with the British people. There can be no justification for such heinous crimes," he said. "I condemn in the strongest terms these attacks, which underline the need for the international community and members of the alliance to remain united in the fight against terrorism."

Blasts Hit Buses, Subway System

Police said incidents were reported at the Aldgate station near the Liverpool Street railway terminal, Edgware Road and King's Cross in north London, Old Street in the financial district, Russell Square in central London, near the British Museum, Aldgate Station and Leicester Square, which is the equivalent of New York City's Times Square. A police official also told reporters there was an incident on a bus in Tavistock Place.

London Ambulance Service said several vehicles had been dispatched to the area near Liverpool Street station.

Bradley Anderson, a subway passenger, told Sky News that "there was some kind of explosion or something" as his train reached the Edgware Road station in northeast London.

"Everything went black and we collided into some kind of oncoming train," Anderson said.

Simon Corvett, 26, who was on an eastbound train from Edgware Road station, said: "All of the sudden there was this massive, huge bang."

"It was absolutely deafening and all the windows shattered," he said. "There were just loads of people screaming and the carriages filled with smoke.

"You could see the carriage opposite was completely gutted," he said. "There were some people in real trouble."

Home Secretary Clarke, in a later address before English lawmakers, said above-ground train service is subject to "substantial delays," but airports are operating normally.

"People are strongly advised not to travel into central London as the emergency services must be allowed to work as effectively as they can," Clarke said.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush had been briefed but offered no other details. Secret Service spokesman Tom Mazur said that Bush's presence had agents monitoring the situation in London, but that the investigation was being left to British authorities.

U.S. officials said they had no intelligence that suggests similar attacks are planned for the United States; there are no plans currently to raise the terror alert system. There also are no plans now for the president to return to Washington.

The Homeland Security Department asked authorities in major cities as well as passengers to continue being alert to any suspicious activities. The U.S. Capitol tightened up security there.

Bomb-sniffing dogs and armed police officers were sent to patrol Washington's subways and buses Thursday. About 1.2 million people a day ride Washington's buses and trains.

A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said recent intelligence indicated that London was considered a prime target for Islamic extremists in part because Al Qaeda was having difficulty getting people into the United States.

"We have been closely monitoring the bombings in London. Our sympathies and condolences go to the victims of this incident and the people of London," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a statement.

"We do not have any specific intelligence indicating this type of attack is planned in the U.S. but we are constantly evaluating both intelligence and protective measures and will take whatever actions are necessary. We will continue to work closely with British officials as they investigate this incident."

Despite early reports that British police warned the Israeli Embassy in London of such possible attacks just before the first explosion, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said Israel was not warned about possible terror attacks in London.

"There was no early information about terrorist attacks," Shalom told Israel Army Radio later. "After the first explosion an order was given that no one move until things become clear. "

Israel was holding an economic conference in a hotel over the London subway stop where one of the blasts occurred. Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was supposed to attend the conference, but "after the first explosion our finance minister received a request not to go anywhere," Shalom said.

FOX News' Catherine Herridge, Liza Porteus, Teri Schultz and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,161768,00.html

Donger
07-07-2005, 08:58 AM
"They seek to divide London, they seek Londoners to turn against each other ... this city of London is the greatest in the world because everybody lives side by side in harmony. Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack."

Livingstone also had words specifically for the terrorists: "I know that you personally do not fear to give your own life in exchange to taking others ... but I know you do fear you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society ... in the days that follow, look at our airports, look at our seaports and look at our railway stations ... you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world, will arrive in London to become Londoners, to fulfill their dream and achieve their potential … whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail."

Most excellent. Reminds me of what another British leader said 65 years ago.

wasi
07-07-2005, 09:00 AM
Amazing...I was in Toronto again several weeks ago and almost EVERYONE that I spoke with had this silly notion that putting our heads in the sand will make the WOT go away.

What I also loved was that the locals didn't want the missile defense, yet were concerned about nukes in NKorea.

Lets go down the list about whose blood was/is shed on behalf of the world:

WW1..WW2..Korea..PGW1..Bosnia..Somelia..PGW2..WOT

1. As with all issues there are times when it seems it has gone away. The War on Terror is a good example. While Canada remains committed, the fact we don't really keep the public updated daily through the media causes the topic to sort of die so to speak. This year there is a large government money scandal, the issue of gay marriage and the budget that are the big news headlines. Now I'm sure if you were here today and the following little while you would get quite a different reaction from what you found, because with out a doubt the topic of terrorism will be on the front page again, and people will be forced to take their head out of the sand as you put it. Toronto is a big city and sometimes the stresses of life and the city can make people forget about Canada's involvement in the War on Terrorism.

2. The possibility of nukes anywhere would concern people would it not? Missle defense is an issue of Canadian sovereignty. I can see why your linking the two, but just because there is a correlation doesnt mean there is causation.

3. That is a terrible statement, do you have any education what so ever?

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 09:05 AM
Canada has troops in Afganistan for example. Next to the military commitment by America, sure this Canadian contribution of sheer numbers of troops might appear small or insignificant. But Canada has done much in intelligence matters. We have reformed our own version of the FBI and begun to share much more information across the border.
However, Canada does not have the material to contribute more military. Our armed forces are at half of what they should be, hindering a larger military presence. Military spending was increased in the last budget but not by very much, instead the government spent money on housing and other societial issues we have here.


It would have been easier to type

"canada just keeps a Token Military, knowing that if anyone were ever to Fug with us, our Big Brother down south would Kick their ass for us".

I'm sure Canana does have a Token troop count in Afganistan.........Safely tucked behind US Troops.

In wars past, Canada has been a friend to both the US and Britain. By your own words, it sounds like Most Canadians now have the attention span of a 10 year old boy with ADD at a carnival and about as much determination to see the job done.


How about starting with making your boarder tighter and more difficult for Terrorists to immigrate to your country and ride a Bike to the US?

Braincase
07-07-2005, 09:06 AM
Anybody wanna guess how long some of those hard-line Islamic clerics that spout of so much vitriol will last in that country...

"BBC News is reporting that 4 outspoken members of the British Islamic Community have fled the country..."

Lzen
07-07-2005, 09:08 AM
Most excellent. Reminds me of what another British leader said 65 years ago.

Yes. He kinda reminds me of uh......what was his name? The NY mayor when they attacked the WTC? Very good leader. Also, Blair is a great leader, IMO.

Edit: Rudi Guiliani - that was his name.

Lzen
07-07-2005, 09:10 AM
I found this to be encouraging. For us, not London. We still have a lot of work to do with our borders, though.

A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said recent intelligence indicated that London was considered a prime target for Islamic extremists in part because Al Qaeda was having difficulty getting people into the United States.

chris
07-07-2005, 09:15 AM
1. As with all issues there are times when it seems it has gone away. The War on Terror is a good example. While Canada remains committed, the fact we don't really keep the public updated daily through the media causes the topic to sort of die so to speak. This year there is a large government money scandal, the issue of gay marriage and the budget that are the big news headlines. Now I'm sure if you were here today and the following little while you would get quite a different reaction from what you found, because with out a doubt the topic of terrorism will be on the front page again, and people will be forced to take their head out of the sand as you put it. Toronto is a big city and sometimes the stresses of life and the city can make people forget about Canada's involvement in the War on Terrorism.

2. The possibility of nukes anywhere would concern people would it not? Missle defense is an issue of Canadian sovereignty. I can see why your linking the two, but just because there is a correlation doesnt mean there is causation.

3. That is a terrible statement, do you have any education what so ever?

I love it. When losing the argument, attack the other party.

Many, many misguided folk in Canada love to hate the US; but expect us to protect them when the bad guys come around.

So we're comparing pee pee sticks now??

Engineering degree, business degree, CEO of numerous tech companies. Want to go away now?

ROFL

Donger
07-07-2005, 09:15 AM
They've bumped up our threat/security levels on our ground transportation systems.

wasi
07-07-2005, 09:25 AM
So we're comparing pee pee sticks now??

Engineering degree, business degree, CEO of numerous tech companies. Want to go away now?
ROFL

I was thinking more along the lines education in the general sense, history to be exact. But all those are really cool too!

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 09:27 AM
Anybody wanna guess how long some of those hard-line Islamic clerics that spout of so much vitriol will last in that country...

"BBC News is reporting that 4 outspoken members of the British Islamic Community have fled the country..."

If they left yesterday...they should be dead or captured by sundown.

The Pedestrian
07-07-2005, 09:28 AM
With how pissed off Paris was for losing the Olympics to London, I thought this thread was about France trying to start something...condolences to England and the victims' families either way.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 09:31 AM
Most excellent. Reminds me of what another British leader said 65 years ago.


Yep. That is a great statement, and what you would expect to hear from a Brit at a time like this.

I hope the historical/traditional British response to such atrocities holds up and does not dwindle into "It's Blair and Bush's fault" whining.

Donger
07-07-2005, 09:35 AM
Yep. That is a great statement, and what you would expect to hear from a Brit at a time like this.

I hope the historical/traditional British response to such atrocities holds up and does not dwindle into "It's Blair and Bush's fault" whining.

There will be some, I'm sure. But, the Brits do take these type of things with an amazing level of calm. It's quite strange. I was in London during the IRA bombings (British Airways and a few others) and personally witnessed the BA bomb. The response was simple amazing. Absolutely no panic; just calm fury.

MOhillbilly
07-07-2005, 09:36 AM
it almost seem like a diversion for a.q. to focus the attention of MUSLIMS away from iraq and the killings a.q. has brought to other MUSLIMS,to show that they can kill white anglo saxons and not just there own.

sorta rally the troops.

Donger
07-07-2005, 09:39 AM
Whoa. US Air Force bases in the UK just raised their threat levels to Charlie.

NJ Chief Fan
07-07-2005, 09:46 AM
truely another unfortunate tragedy, my prays go out to all the families in suffering in this hour

but i am a little happy that New York City didnt win the bid to get the olympicd in 2012

RedDread
07-07-2005, 09:47 AM
Sounds like I should start packing my bags again *sigh*

UKMike
07-07-2005, 10:07 AM
truely another unfortunate tragedy, my prays go out to all the families in suffering in this hour

but i am a little happy that New York City didnt win the bid to get the olympicd in 2012

I don't think its related to the olympic bid. Noone really expected us to get it and this would of taken more than a days planning.

Lzen
07-07-2005, 10:11 AM
I don't think its related to the olympic bid. Noone really expected us to get it and this would of taken more than a days planning.

Are you in London, Mike?

Donger
07-07-2005, 10:11 AM
I don't think its related to the olympic bid. Noone really expected us to get it and this would of taken more than a days planning.

Are you in England now?

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 10:13 AM
I too think the olympic bid is a coincidence. This is the type of attack that would have taken alot of preparation and planning. I'll bet its been in the works for months, due to coincide with the G8 summit.

Our prayers are with those harmed and affected in the UK.

Find the culprits and I'm sure the Brits can count on the US to assist with some heavy duty payback.

I almost wish our nations would show those guilty just how barbaric we COULD be.

NJ Chief Fan
07-07-2005, 10:13 AM
I don't think its related to the olympic bid. Noone really expected us to get it and this would of taken more than a days planning.
obviously it wasnt an over night type thing...but maybe the terrorist had people stationed in nyc, london and paris in case either of them won the bid for the 2012 olympics...we will truely never know what the real deal is with that but it is still a possibilty

nolimitpk
07-07-2005, 10:14 AM
You dont think these attacks could have been put in place to gain support for the failings of Mr. Blair among the public? His support has dropped so severely that such an attack could scare the public into trusting him more so than ever?
Nobody is mentioning the fact that the Isreali ambassador had a warning prior to the first attack. Hmmmmm.
Wouldnt they be monitoring the transportation systems a little better after the Spain incident?
Sorry I just can't buy this. This was something that was set up to gain support for Blair. Fear is the best weapon to use in gaining support and trust me, Blair knows this first hand by watching George W.

Donger
07-07-2005, 10:16 AM
You dont think these attacks could have been put in place to gain support for the failings of Mr. Blair among the public? His support has dropped so severely that such an attack could scare the public into trusting him more so than ever?
Nobody is mentioning the fact that the Isreali ambassador had a warning prior to the first attack. Hmmmmm.
Wouldnt they be monitoring the transportation systems a little better after the Spain incident?
Sorry I just can't buy this. This was something that was set up to gain support for Blair. Fear is the best weapon to use in gaining support and trust me, Blair knows this first hand by watching George W.

Crawl back under your rock, and may it crush you when you do.

Hercules Rockefell
07-07-2005, 10:19 AM
Nobody is mentioning the fact that the Isreali ambassador had a warning prior to the first attack. Hmmmmm.


Good to see the Far Left has engaged in more 9/11-type conspiracy theories.

But too bad this little piece of "news" info has already been corrected. Netanyahu was warned after the first bomb went off, not before.

nolimitpk
07-07-2005, 10:23 AM
Of course it was corrected. Are you kidding me? You think they would let that stand. It was caught plan and simple. You know that everytime something is reported in the media from the first time to the last things constantly change. The truth almost always comes out in the early stages. For you please refer to Hitler's right hand man.
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

Lzen
07-07-2005, 10:24 AM
You dont think these attacks could have been put in place to gain support for the failings of Mr. Blair among the public? His support has dropped so severely that such an attack could scare the public into trusting him more so than ever?
Nobody is mentioning the fact that the Isreali ambassador had a warning prior to the first attack. Hmmmmm.
Wouldnt they be monitoring the transportation systems a little better after the Spain incident?
Sorry I just can't buy this. This was something that was set up to gain support for Blair. Fear is the best weapon to use in gaining support and trust me, Blair knows this first hand by watching George W.

Excuse me, I think you lost your hat.


http://www.hallucinaut.com/foilhats/patshat01.jpg

nolimitpk
07-07-2005, 10:25 AM
Why didnt they just bomb Live 8? They want to kill innocent people right? They were in London. Tell me that. Hundreds of thousands of people there for a good cause.
The people in London dont like Blair so why would they hurt those people and then make support for Blair go up?
You people need to step back and take a bigger look.

UKMike
07-07-2005, 10:31 AM
Are you in London, Mike?

No i live about a half hour north of London.

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 10:31 AM
you need to stop tieing the plastic bag so tightly over your head when you're wanking....

This is just another, in a long list of cowardly attacks by a horde of donkey humping morons.

Find them and Kill them.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 10:34 AM
Why didnt they just bomb Live 8? They want to kill innocent people right? They were in London. Tell me that. Hundreds of thousands of people there for a good cause.
The people in London dont like Blair so why would they hurt those people and then make support for Blair go up?
You people need to step back and take a bigger look.

The ruling government of Messier 31, Andromeda galaxy, called. They want their tracking device back.

cdcox
07-07-2005, 10:35 AM
Wouldnt they be monitoring the transportation systems a little better after the Spain incident?


Sure there are CCTV and such but that is not enough to stop a determined terrorist attack. There is a huge Muslim population in London. Free societies don't put soldiers on trains or track the goings on of every person. I've been on subways in NYC, Buston, DC and London all in the last 2 years. Security on all of them is very minimal. You cannot even begin to prove a conspiracy based on this observation.

Brock
07-07-2005, 10:38 AM
You dont think these attacks could have been put in place to gain support for the failings of Mr. Blair among the public? His support has dropped so severely that such an attack could scare the public into trusting him more so than ever?
Nobody is mentioning the fact that the Isreali ambassador had a warning prior to the first attack. Hmmmmm.
Wouldnt they be monitoring the transportation systems a little better after the Spain incident?
Sorry I just can't buy this. This was something that was set up to gain support for Blair. Fear is the best weapon to use in gaining support and trust me, Blair knows this first hand by watching George W.

Please kill yourself ASAP.

Frazod
07-07-2005, 10:39 AM
I have family in London - I was very relieved to get an e-mail this morning saying they're all okay.

Another wake up call for the civilized world. I wonder how many of the f#cking animals who participated in this were on somebody's watchlist. Its time to turn the watchlists into deadlists.

Lzen
07-07-2005, 10:40 AM
No i live about a half hour north of London.

Well, glad to see that you're okay. I'll bet it's chaos around there right now. My condolences to all the Londoners that were killed or injured.

cdcox
07-07-2005, 10:40 AM
I have family in London - I was very relieved to get an e-mail this morning saying they're all okay.

Another wake up call for the civilized world. I wonder how many of the f#cking animals who participated in this were on somebody's watchlist. Its time to turn the watchlists into deadlists.

Glad to hear your family is okay.

Donger
07-07-2005, 10:42 AM
No i live about a half hour north of London.

Though I doubt you need to hear it, keep your chin up, mate.

vailpass
07-07-2005, 10:46 AM
The ruling government of Messier 31, Andromeda galaxy, called. They want their tracking device back.

ROFL Good stuff. Somebody ban that f*ck at least for today. Show a little respect you freak.

Rain Man
07-07-2005, 10:47 AM
Why didnt they just bomb Live 8? They want to kill innocent people right? They were in London. Tell me that. Hundreds of thousands of people there for a good cause.
The people in London dont like Blair so why would they hurt those people and then make support for Blair go up?
You people need to step back and take a bigger look.

My theory is that aliens are doing it to drive a wedge between us earthlings and make it easier for them to take over the planet to raise their version of cattle. Since my theory is more logical than yours, I suggest that you consider it.

nolimitpk
07-07-2005, 10:48 AM
You all obviously by into it just like they want you to. Pathetic. Once again take a step back and look at what's really going on.

On another note, The war on terror and Iraq are 2 different things. Did you not see the whistleblower that popped documents out showing that the war in Iraq was planned well in advance and that they needed to sex the reports up to get the rest of the British government to agree and to try to ease over public outcry?
Right now in Iraq if we didnt invade there would be no problems in Iraq. Iraq gave terrorists a place to go and kill Americans without leaving the Middle East and thats why the insurgency is non stop. They all get a chance to be Martyrs. They dont have to get smuggled into the US or elsewhere, they just have to hope a border and try their best to kill some Americans in Iraq.
Im also sure that you think it was justified to go into Iraq citing WMDs right? And that Al Qaeda and Saddam were sleeping together?

GET REAL!

BTW I HAVE SOME OCEAN FRONT PROPERTY IN ARIZONA FOR SALE SO JUST PM ME ITS REALLY CHEAP ONLY $50 AN ACRE. HELL IF YOU BOUGHT ALL THIS FROM GEORGE W AND TONY BLAIR THEN MY REAL ESTATE SHOULD SEEM LIKE A GREAT DEAL!

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 10:50 AM
Can someone abort this douchbag....like his mother unfortunately got too high again, to make the appointment.

Hercules Rockefell
07-07-2005, 10:50 AM
So you're saying the terrorists are going to Iraq to fight the US military, the best fighting force in the history of mankind, instead of trying to infiltrate the US border and kill innocent civilians?

I can't believe our civilian politicians would support something like that.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 10:53 AM
Sorry, I can't ban this burn@stake wannabe.

He's just too entertaining.

KCFalcon59
07-07-2005, 11:00 AM
You all obviously by into it just like they want you to. Pathetic. Once again take a step back and look at what's really going on.

On another note, The war on terror and Iraq are 2 different things. Did you not see the whistleblower that popped documents out showing that the war in Iraq was planned well in advance and that they needed to sex the reports up to get the rest of the British government to agree and to try to ease over public outcry?
Right now in Iraq if we didnt invade there would be no problems in Iraq. Iraq gave terrorists a place to go and kill Americans without leaving the Middle East and thats why the insurgency is non stop. They all get a chance to be Martyrs. They dont have to get smuggled into the US or elsewhere, they just have to hope a border and try their best to kill some Americans in Iraq.
Im also sure that you think it was justified to go into Iraq citing WMDs right? And that Al Qaeda and Saddam were sleeping together?

GET REAL!

BTW I HAVE SOME OCEAN FRONT PROPERTY IN ARIZONA FOR SALE SO JUST PM ME ITS REALLY CHEAP ONLY $50 AN ACRE. HELL IF YOU BOUGHT ALL THIS FROM GEORGE W AND TONY BLAIR THEN MY REAL ESTATE SHOULD SEEM LIKE A GREAT DEAL!

yer stoopid. goe awa!

Barret
07-07-2005, 11:01 AM
Iowanian,

I have to slightly disagree with you concerning the Canadians. I dont have the article but I do remember some highly skilled Canadian sniper teams assiting pinned down US forces in Afghanistan. Also I think one of those snipers has a recorded longest kill shot over there.

I believe that the Canadians are using more "Special Forces" types over there to assist and not using major military support. I dont believe they have the ability to fund or support a long term, large force that far away from home.

Could they do more? Maybe, I dont know about that, I think my main point is that they do have some support there helping us as best as they can. I can think of a number of other countries that have much larger armies then the Canadians that arent doing anything except sitting on their collective thumbs

Lzen
07-07-2005, 11:04 AM
I have family in London - I was very relieved to get an e-mail this morning saying they're all okay.

Another wake up call for the civilized world. I wonder how many of the f#cking animals who participated in this were on somebody's watchlist. Its time to turn the watchlists into deadlists.


:clap:

NJ Chief Fan
07-07-2005, 11:08 AM
im a little worried people...my mom and sister are taking off to go to europe tomorrow this isnt the type of news that i wanted to hear before they leave i dont think i am gonna be able to sleep the next couple days till i know that they arrive safe at their destination

vailpass
07-07-2005, 11:09 AM
Iowanian,

I have to slightly disagree with you concerning the Canadians. I dont have the article but I do remember some highly skilled Canadian sniper teams assiting pinned down US forces in Afghanistan. Also I think one of those snipers has a recorded longest kill shot over there.

I believe that the Canadians are using more "Special Forces" types over there to assist and not using major military support. I dont believe they have the ability to fund or support a long term, large force that far away from home.

Could they do more? Maybe, I dont know about that, I think my main point is that they do have some support there helping us as best as they can. I can think of a number of other countries that have much larger armies then the Canadians that arent doing anything except sitting on their collective thumbs

IMHO it's not military support that Americans really want out of Canda so much as solidarity.
We're their kind and benevolent neighbor and they know we would be there to help them whenever they needed us. Now, in our moment of need since 9/11 it would be good if Canda could just say "we stand with you, we appreciate you, and we support you". If they don't send troops no big deal it's not like we need them but for God sake quit taking the US for granted. What do you think life in Canada would be like if China were your neighbor?
The Canuck on this thread is claiming they are too busy in Canada worrying about gay marriage and a budget deficit to think about our war on terror. Holy shit are you kidding me? You better worry every day about America's well being because without US Canada is no more.

Lzen
07-07-2005, 11:09 AM
Please kill yourself ASAP.

Good advice. Have you ever considered a career in psychiatry?

Lzen
07-07-2005, 11:11 AM
im a little worried people...my mom and sister are taking off to go to europe tomorrow this isnt the type of news that i wanted to hear before they leave i dont think i am gonna be able to sleep the next couple days till i know that they arrive safe at their destination


What's their purpose for going over there? If it's nothing major, maybe you could talk them out of it.


I know I'm not much help. That's all I got.

Rain Man
07-07-2005, 11:14 AM
im a little worried people...my mom and sister are taking off to go to europe tomorrow this isnt the type of news that i wanted to hear before they leave i dont think i am gonna be able to sleep the next couple days till i know that they arrive safe at their destination

Nothing to worry about. Don't let them freak out and cancel a good vacation.

Where are they going?

Donger
07-07-2005, 11:16 AM
What's their purpose for going over there? If it's nothing major, maybe you could talk them out of it.


I know I'm not much help. That's all I got.

Nah. I'd encourage them to go. Don't let these f*ckers terrorize you or your family.

NJ Chief Fan
07-07-2005, 11:32 AM
What's their purpose for going over there? If it's nothing major, maybe you could talk them out of it.


I know I'm not much help. That's all I got.

my mom and sister are going over to see my cousins wedding(hes also my mothers godson) and her mom is really sick aswell so she doesnt have alot of time left and she probably wont see her again if she doesnt go and by the way they are going to poland...its not london but there are still some worries regardless

Calcountry
07-07-2005, 11:45 AM
I'm assuming you mean the War on Terror?
Have you already forgotten about the bombings in Spain last year? Spain is in Europe? Spain has also been "in this" since the beginning. Now, in your statement.. I think your confusing two very different things.

There is the War on Terror, which Europe collectively (and most of the world for that matter-even Canada) is very much behind.
Then there is the War in Iraq, which most of Europe is not behind. No attack on Paris or Berlin will get Europe collectively into the fight in Iraq. That is what it sounds like you are saying.No, your confusing things. First, there is the War on terror. And second, there is the war in your ass.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 12:38 PM
There will be some, I'm sure. But, the Brits do take these type of things with an amazing level of calm. It's quite strange. I was in London during the IRA bombings (British Airways and a few others) and personally witnessed the BA bomb. The response was simple amazing. Absolutely no panic; just calm fury.


Oh I know, I have always admired the English for the way they handle such situations. I know short term how they will respond to this. I am thinking a little further down the road. Are they going to use this as amunition against Blair, or are they going to get fully behind him now?

Duck Dog
07-07-2005, 01:03 PM
IMO the War on Terror is very much separate from the War in Iraq.
One is supported by the UN, the other is not.

So UN approval automaticaly legitimizes it?

Duck Dog
07-07-2005, 01:17 PM
Wow, from reading through these pages, one things stands clear.

Now, I'm not for internment camps, but at times like these liberals should lose the right to talk. In the long run it will help them and they'll thank us for it.

Donger
07-07-2005, 01:19 PM
Oh I know, I have always admired the English for the way they handle such situations. I know short term how they will respond to this. I am thinking a little further down the road. Are they going to use this as amunition against Blair, or are they going to get fully behind him now?

I honestly don't know. Perhaps for some, it will have given them a sense of what we went through on 9/11. That might change some opinions.

wasi
07-07-2005, 01:21 PM
So UN approval automaticaly legitimizes it?

Any multilateral agreement between democratic nations legitimizes a war in my opinion.

Brock
07-07-2005, 01:26 PM
The UN believes that Syria makes a fine leader for the Security Council. Nobody should care what the UN thinks about anything.

Hercules Rockefell
07-07-2005, 01:37 PM
Any multilateral agreement between democratic nations legitimizes a war in my opinion.

and the UN is full dictatorships run by thugs, with China on the Security Council. The last place you'll find agreements between democratic nations is the UN.

It also looked to me that there was an agreement between democratic nations that went into Iraq.

Iowanian
07-07-2005, 01:39 PM
The UN believes that Syria makes a fine leader for the Security Council. Nobody should care what the UN thinks about anything.

Well Brock, Why WOULDN'T a Historically upstanding nation who just tested 3 Scud missiles, to carry bio warheads not be an excellent Security Council leader? I mean, surely they legitimize that council.

wasi
07-07-2005, 02:00 PM
and the UN is full dictatorships run by thugs, with China on the Security Council. The last place you'll find agreements between democratic nations is the UN.

It also looked to me that there was an agreement between democratic nations that went into Iraq.

The UN is not perfect, but for those that believe in multilaterism in global issues the UN provides a vital forum for debate and decision making.

You are also absolutely right that there was an agreement between democratic nations on the war in Iraq. However, IMO in this day and age I would say having more than only a handful of these nations sign and be involved actually legitimizes the action or agreement. Thus, the point about the UN and why it is so vital.

MOhillbilly
07-07-2005, 02:03 PM
shove the dove up your ass hippy.

yeti
07-07-2005, 02:06 PM
Shoudn't the legitimization for a war be self evident? Why must we search so hard for the truth? It's possible that terrorism can be partially controlled but never totally. The price of freedom is terrorism and the price of no terrorism is freedom. Just a thought.

Calcountry
07-07-2005, 02:08 PM
Shoudn't the legitimization for a war be self evident? Why must we search so hard for the truth? It's possible that terrorism can be partially controlled but never totally. The price of freedom is terrorism and the price of no terrorism is freedom. Just a thought.The price of your ability to spout off intellectual dumbassery is paid for with American GI's blood.

yeti
07-07-2005, 02:13 PM
I am not downplaying the sacrifice of American soldiers.

vailpass
07-07-2005, 02:13 PM
The UN is not perfect, but for those that believe in multilaterism in global issues the UN provides a vital forum for debate and decision making.

You are also absolutely right that there was an agreement between democratic nations on the war in Iraq. However, IMO in this day and age I would say having more than only a handful of these nations sign and be involved actually legitimizes the action or agreement. Thus, the point about the UN and why it is so vital.

The UN has devolved into a tool with which small nations can band together and try and control the US. This happens because the US allows it to happen. We are slowly moving away from the UN; it hurts the US much more than it helps yet we fund the majority of the damn thing.
The UN is vital only to those countries who otherwise would have no say in what the most powerful countries do i.e. french Canadians.

Calcountry
07-07-2005, 02:15 PM
Any multilateral agreement between democratic nations legitimizes a war in my opinion.ROFL There is nothing legitmate about ANY war. They are usually quite hellish and bastardly in nature.

The only thing that guarantees our countries right to wage war is our survival.

UKMike
07-07-2005, 02:39 PM
Though I doubt you need to hear it, keep your chin up, mate.

Yeah, I will. We've been waiting for something like this for ages people were ready for it. In a way I think theres a sense of relief at the amount of deaths and casualties compared to what could have been, and also people are glad that everything in the aftermath went so smoothly.

Oh I know, I have always admired the English for the way they handle such situations. I know short term how they will respond to this. I am thinking a little further down the road. Are they going to use this as amunition against Blair, or are they going to get fully behind him now?

I don't think it'll make a whole lot of difference. If anything, the way it was dealt with will make people get behind him. There's no chance of the same thing happening here as happened in Spain.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 02:58 PM
So UN approval automaticaly legitimizes it?


If that is the case, dickweed here fails to realize that he is cutting his own throat with his argument. How many different resolutions did the UN pass authorizing the use of force in Iraq? Something like 9 was it not?

Sounds "legitimate" to me.

RedDread
07-07-2005, 03:03 PM
Andrei Cherny
“We will stay with you to the last.”

“We were with you at the first. We will stay with you to the last.” Those were the words of Tony Blair in response to the attacks of 9-11. They are a stark reminder to us today. And now we Americans are going to be tested in our response.

It has been easy, as the months since September 11th, 2001 have stretched into years, to go back to business as usual. We have sometimes forgotten we are in the midst of a War on Terror.

Some on the far left have claimed that there is no such war – that’s it just a conservative catchphrase. That rings fairly hollow today.

At the same time, the Bush Administration has not been truly serious about fighting that War on Terror. Osama bin Laden is still on the loose – his freedom mocking our vow to fight. We have made no progress in making America energy independent. We have not been forceful and committed enough in fostering democracy around the world. And the lack of foresight in the war in Iraq took troops and translators and time away from tracking down and breaking the terrorist networks.

More time has passed since 9-11 than the time between Pearl Harbor and V-J Day. Sixty years ago, it took America three years and eight months to form a global alliance to invade North Africa and Normandy and free whole continents from despotism. This Administration put tax cuts ahead of defeating terror.

This is the moment that progressives should stand up and lead the way for America in showing how to fight and – eventually win – the War on Terror. Mobilizing millions of Americans, in a myriad of different ways, to serve and protect the country. Making us free from the grip of dependence on Mideast oil. Leading a true, lasting, and muscular push for democracy and freedom around the world. Not just using the London tube bombings as a way of looking backward and securing our public transportation (as we did with airlines after 9-11), but looking forward and securing our borders and bridges, seaports and airports, nuclear and chemical plants. Tracking down and destroying the world’s loose nuclear material. Winning the battle of ideas against the cruel ideology of Muslim extremism and winning the hearts and minds of people around the world with a battle against poverty, disease, and despair.

America needs our leadership, not just our criticism of the errors of others.

Speaking of those who fell on September 11th, Prime Minister Blair said: “I believe their memorial can and should be greater than simply the punishment of the guilty. It is that out of the shadow of this evil, should emerge lasting good: destruction of the machinery of terrorism wherever it is found; hope amongst all nations of a new beginning where we seek to resolve differences in a calm and ordered way; greater understanding between nations and between faiths; and above all justice and prosperity for the poor and dispossessed, so that people everywhere can see the chance of a better future through the hard work and creative power of the free citizen, not the violence and savagery of the fanatic.”

New names were added to that memorial in London this morning. Our commitment to building it should grow even stronger.


:clap:

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 03:03 PM
I don't think it'll make a whole lot of difference. If anything, the way it was dealt with will make people get behind him. There's no chance of the same thing happening here as happened in Spain.


I certainly hope you are right. I never thought such a large portion of my country would turn on its leader in the WOT due to false charges of lying. I underestimated the petty political hatred of many of my fellow countrymen.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 03:07 PM
:clap:


A pretty worthless article.

wasi
07-07-2005, 03:25 PM
If that is the case, dickweed here fails to realize that he is cutting his own throat with his argument. How many different resolutions did the UN pass authorizing the use of force in Iraq? Something like 9 was it not?

Sounds "legitimate" to me.

Actually, I never directly linked the arguement of the importance of the UN with the discussion about Iraq. I did say that IMO multilateralism is needed for justification. For some having a handful of nations in agreement is multilateralism then to those people war certainly is justified. However, for others such as myself, multilateralism is a broader show of support. The arguement about the UN is only brought up because it's the only thing in international relations in this day and age that is a pluralist institution. For me, its the UN for my parents generation it was the League of Nations.

It's been a few years since I studied these things but if I remember correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong but resolutions really mean nothing. Resolutions are only signed pieces of international law, not yet ratified. When resolutions are ratified by each nation they become protocol, and only then are they real laws or treaties.

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 03:26 PM
I'm so glad our ability to defend ourselves is legitimized by a bunch of national socialists and despots from Asia and Africa.

MOhillbilly
07-07-2005, 03:28 PM
say it loud.:clap:

Rausch
07-07-2005, 03:30 PM
A pretty worthless article.

I thought it was pretty spot on. America isn't doing all it can to fight the WOT which should be pretty obvious by now...

CoMoChief
07-07-2005, 03:35 PM
In other news...........................testicles.

Donger
07-07-2005, 03:43 PM
I thought it was pretty spot on. America isn't doing all it can to fight the WOT which should be pretty obvious by now...

What would you like be doing differently? Other than better security at our borders (and they are getting better, I've heard) and perhaps covertly going after bin laden in Pakistan (if we aren't already), I'd say that we're doing pretty well.

Let's not forget, we haven't had a major attack on our soil since 9/11, and that to me is surprising. If someone had suggested that would be the case on 9/12/01, I would have considered them nuts.

Another example is the stopping of the NYC subway bombing plot, and there are probably others that aren't publicized.

So, what would you like to see change?

htismaqe
07-07-2005, 03:59 PM
What would you like be doing differently? Other than better security at our borders (and they are getting better, I've heard) and perhaps covertly going after bin laden in Pakistan (if we aren't already), I'd say that we're doing pretty well.

Let's not forget, we haven't had a major attack on our soil since 9/11, and that to me is surprising. If someone had suggested that would be the case on 9/12/01, I would have considered them nuts.

Another example is the stopping of the NYC subway bombing plot, and there are probably others that aren't publicized.

So, what would you like to see change?

Knowing Rausch the way I do, I'm guessing his response will mention either tactical nukes or firing squads...

Rausch
07-07-2005, 04:16 PM
What would you like be doing differently? Other than better security at our borders (and they are getting better, I've heard) and perhaps covertly going after bin laden in Pakistan (if we aren't already), I'd say that we're doing pretty well.


So, other than protecting the homeland and chasing down the lead terrorist we're doing ok?...



Let's not forget, we haven't had a major attack on our soil since 9/11, and that to me is surprising. If someone had suggested that would be the case on 9/12/01, I would have considered them nuts.

Another example is the stopping of the NYC subway bombing plot, and there are probably others that aren't publicized.

So, what would you like to see change?

I'd like Bush to do what he said he would do: hold countries responsible for aiding and harboring terrorists and treat them no different than the terrorists themselves.

Right now we aren't even turning the screws on azz-backwards nations like Pakistan or Syria (obvious and blatant terrorist supporting nations.)

What Pakistan thinks obout our teams crossing their borders to hunt terrorists shouldn't ****ing matter. We should do whatever makes America safer, not what makes us more safe as long as it doesn't insult the delicate sensibilities of Dictators and warlords.

Rausch
07-07-2005, 04:18 PM
Knowing Rausch the way I do, I'm guessing his response will mention either tactical nukes or firing squads...

Nukes are flat out too "dirty" and I wouldn't want neighboring nations to suffer for it.

There are plenty of other big sticks we can drop on these douchebags without putting Americans on the ground.

Ultra Peanut
07-07-2005, 04:20 PM
I guess this happened while I was playing City of Heroes. Then I went to bed without flipping on the TV.

Wow.

What. The. ****?!

Yeah, I will. We've been waiting for something like this for ages people were ready for it.:(

Donger
07-07-2005, 04:25 PM
So, other than protecting the homeland and chasing down the lead terrorist we're doing ok?...

Yes, I do. Based on the fact that we haven't had a major attack since 9/11. Do I think we could do better? Yes, by shoring up our borders and, like I said, covertly going into Pakistan. With regards to the latter, I wouldn't be surprised if we aren't already.

I'd like Bush to do what he said he would do: hold countries responsible for aiding and harboring terrorists and treat them no different than the terrorists themselves.

Right now we aren't even turning the screws on azz-backwards nations like Pakistan or Syria (obvious and blatant terrorist supporting nations.)

What Pakistan thinks obout our teams crossing their borders to hunt terrorists shouldn't ****ing matter. We should do whatever makes America safer, not what makes us more safe as long as it doesn't insult the delicate sensibilities of Dictators and warlords.

I'm sure that we are putting pressure on the Pakistanis, probably most of it behind-the-scenes. I don't think that overt military action would serve either our short or long term interests.

Donger
07-07-2005, 04:27 PM
I guess this happened while I was playing City of Heroes. Then I went to bed without flipping on the TV.

Wow.

What. The. ****?!

:(

The British tend to be rather non-plussed people. The whole "stiff upper lip" thing is not a fallacy; it's borderline genetic, IMO.

Rausch
07-07-2005, 04:33 PM
I'm sure that we are putting pressure on the Pakistanis, probably most of it behind-the-scenes. I don't think that overt military action would serve either our short or long term interests.

I think it would.

Right now Bush looks like a "talk tough - do little" president. Since he started his 2nd term there's very little he's done to impress me.

It's one thing if a rouge group comes over and tries to blow something up but it's completely different what Iran and Syria are doing.

Rausch
07-07-2005, 04:34 PM
The British tend to be rather non-plussed people. The whole "stiff upper lip" thing is not a fallacy; it's borderline genetic, IMO.

I'd have to agree.

And they've got a lot more experience with this type of thing anyway...

Donger
07-07-2005, 04:45 PM
I think it would.

Right now Bush looks like a "talk tough - do little" president. Since he started his 2nd term there's very little he's done to impress me.

It's one thing if a rouge group comes over and tries to blow something up but it's completely different what Iran and Syria are doing.

I think in the case of Pakistan, either a Musharraf -sanctioned, quasi invasion or an overt, non-sanctioned invasion could very well lead to a revolution in Pakistan. That would be bad. Comparably, worse than what we have now. And we're not being told everything that's going on between our two countries.

Rausch
07-07-2005, 04:53 PM
I think in the case of Pakistan, either a Musharraf -sanctioned, quasi invasion or an overt, non-sanctioned invasion could very well lead to a revolution in Pakistan. That would be bad. Comparably, worse than what we have now. And we're not being told everything that's going on between our two countries.

I've only talked to three Paki's about this (one prof and two students at the local college) but all three agreed that it isn't a matter of if but when the Good general get's overthrown. I don't know how truthful this actually is but they said pretty much all of Pakistan hates the guy and wants him out.

I think backing him is a horrible idea if there's any validity to their claims.

Donger
07-07-2005, 04:56 PM
I've only talked to three Paki's about this (one prof and two students at the local college) but all three agreed that it isn't a matter of if but when the Good general get's overthrown. I don't know how truthful this actually is but they said pretty much all of Pakistan hates the guy and wants him out.

I think backing him is a horrible idea if there's any validity to their claims.

Probably true. And the alternative would be a government decidedly anti-US. At least Musharref is borderline friendly.

Rausch
07-07-2005, 05:01 PM
Probably true. And the alternative would be a government decidedly anti-US. At least Musharref is borderline friendly.

I don't see how the place doesn't end up anti-US.

We support the Gen. and the whole nation resents us.

The only organized oppositioon is Ossama-friendly.

I honestly don't have an answer to the leadership problem there but the people in power here better come up with one quick...

Duck Dog
07-07-2005, 05:05 PM
Any multilateral agreement between democratic nations legitimizes a war in my opinion.


Cool. So the war in Iraq is legit to you then?

Lonewolf Ed
07-07-2005, 05:18 PM
Good to see the Far Left has engaged in more 9/11-type conspiracy theories.

But too bad this little piece of "news" info has already been corrected. Netanyahu was warned after the first bomb went off, not before.

Stop clouding the left's issues with facts! They don't like that. :harumph:

Coach
07-07-2005, 05:18 PM
Hmm, I thought this was interesting to look at.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050707/ap_on_re_mi_ea/explosions_us_britain_1

By The Associated Press
42 minutes ago



A comparison of the timelines for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in New York and Washington, and Thursday's bombings in London. Times listed are local; London is five hours ahead of Eastern Daylight Time.

Sept. 11, 2001

8:46 a.m. — Flight 11 hits the World Trade Center's north tower.

9:03 a.m. — Flight 175 crashes into the south tower of the World Trade Center.

9:37 a.m. — Flight 77 hits the Pentagon.

10:03 a.m. — United 93 crashes in Pennsylvania, 125 miles from Washington.

July 7, 2005

8:51 a.m. — London Underground train explodes 100 yards into a tunnel near the financial district.

8:56 a.m. — Explosion near the King's Cross station in north London.

9:17 a.m. — Explosion near Edgware Road station.

9:47 a.m. — Double-decker bus explodes near Tavistock Square.

elvomito
07-07-2005, 05:36 PM
coach, they time it that way in order to capture news coverage the whole day

here's a little slideshow with pics from today
http://www.realcities.com/multimedia/nationalchannel/news/archive/london_blasts/index.html

yeti
07-07-2005, 06:06 PM
So, other than protecting the homeland and chasing down the lead terrorist we're doing ok?...





I'd like Bush to do what he said he would do: hold countries responsible for aiding and harboring terrorists and treat them no different than the terrorists themselves.

Right now we aren't even turning the screws on azz-backwards nations like Pakistan or Syria (obvious and blatant terrorist supporting nations.)

What Pakistan thinks obout our teams crossing their borders to hunt terrorists shouldn't ****ing matter. We should do whatever makes America safer, not what makes us more safe as long as it doesn't insult the delicate sensibilities of Dictators and warlords.

How do you feel about the Saudis? Osama in one, many of the insurgents/terrorists entering Iraq are Saudis. Maybe we should take a look at that.

alanm
07-07-2005, 06:33 PM
I don't see how the place doesn't end up anti-US.

We support the Gen. and the whole nation resents us.

The only organized oppositioon is Ossama-friendly.

I honestly don't have an answer to the leadership problem there but the people in power here better come up with one quick...
We could always have India poke em with a stick. :)

Fairplay
07-07-2005, 08:17 PM
You know this all wouldn't have happened if Guntherfan was over there with his assault rifle.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 10:09 PM
Actually, I never directly linked the arguement of the importance of the UN with the discussion about Iraq. I did say that IMO multilateralism is needed for justification. For some having a handful of nations in agreement is multilateralism then to those people war certainly is justified. However, for others such as myself, multilateralism is a broader show of support. The arguement about the UN is only brought up because it's the only thing in international relations in this day and age that is a pluralist institution. For me, its the UN for my parents generation it was the League of Nations.

It's been a few years since I studied these things but if I remember correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong but resolutions really mean nothing. Resolutions are only signed pieces of international law, not yet ratified. When resolutions are ratified by each nation they become protocol, and only then are they real laws or treaties.


You are such a moron. That is exactly what we had. We did not unilateraly sign those resolutions.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 10:10 PM
I thought it was pretty spot on. America isn't doing all it can to fight the WOT which should be pretty obvious by now...


Are there areas we are lacking in? Sure (can you say our borders?). But this worthless article makes it sound as if we are doing almost nothing, and that is simply not true.

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 10:14 PM
What would you like be doing differently? Other than better security at our borders (and they are getting better, I've heard) and perhaps covertly going after bin laden in Pakistan (if we aren't already), I'd say that we're doing pretty well.

Let's not forget, we haven't had a major attack on our soil since 9/11, and that to me is surprising. If someone had suggested that would be the case on 9/12/01, I would have considered them nuts.

Another example is the stopping of the NYC subway bombing plot, and there are probably others that aren't publicized.

So, what would you like to see change?


The worst that has happened was a video tape attack by bin Laden right before the election (the time I thought to be the most likely for an attack). A f#cking video tape was the best he could pull off. And the red states are still waiting for him to follow through on his threat......

Raiderhader
07-07-2005, 10:21 PM
I'd like Bush to do what he said he would do: hold countries responsible for aiding and harboring terrorists and treat them no different than the terrorists themselves.

Right now we aren't even turning the screws on azz-backwards nations like Pakistan or Syria (obvious and blatant terrorist supporting nations.)

Is that not what we are doing right now? We have troops in both Afghanastan and Iraq. And Iraq is the real proof that Bush is doing what he said he would. Most thought his words were just patriotic and consoling sentiment during a troubled time. When we actually started to move on Iraq, people could not believe it. He was only doing what he said he was going to do.

As for the other countries, we do not exactly have a China-sized army at our disposal, just how many countries do you want us to invade this month... er, realisticly speaking that is? Until we complete the tasks at hand, other avenues have to be taken with these other nations.

What Pakistan thinks obout our teams crossing their borders to hunt terrorists shouldn't ****ing matter. We should do whatever makes America safer, not what makes us more safe as long as it doesn't insult the delicate sensibilities of Dictators and warlords.

As Donger has already stated, we could already be doing this and just not know it. Just because we are not privy to clandestine ops, does not mean they are not taking place.

Ultra Peanut
07-07-2005, 10:50 PM
A post I made on another forum on July 1st:

Sharks, terriorist
Go together like cake and ice cream. Anyone remember 2001?Can I call 'em, or what?

Toss in the "dead girl whose body hadn't been found yet that the media endlessly focuses on," and we all should have seen the signs. We're lucky it wasn't worse.

UKMike
07-08-2005, 04:42 AM
I guess this happened while I was playing City of Heroes. Then I went to bed without flipping on the TV.

Wow.

What. The. ****?!

:(


Sorry if what I said sounded insensitive, it wasn't meant to.

Ultra Peanut
07-08-2005, 04:22 PM
Sorry if what I said sounded insensitive, it wasn't meant to.It wasn't that it was insensitive, it was just sort of depressing to realize that it was real and that people are actually having to deal with it.

It's pretty impressive how you guys have already told the terrorists to bugger off and have gone right back into your standard operating patterns, though. I know it has to be difficult, but mad props to the UK as a whole.

The Pedestrian
07-08-2005, 06:12 PM
I too think the olympic bid is a coincidence. This is the type of attack that would have taken alot of preparation and planning. I'll bet its been in the works for months, due to coincide with the G8 summit.

Our prayers are with those harmed and affected in the UK.

Find the culprits and I'm sure the Brits can count on the US to assist with some heavy duty payback.

I almost wish our nations would show those guilty just how barbaric we COULD be.

I've been looking for the article (unfortunately, it seems to be buried under articles related to this story), but it was reported on FOX that Moscow had received a terrorist threat saying Moscow would be bombed if they were chosen to host the 2012 Olympics. I have a feeling that this means they were ready to launch an attack against whichever city had been given the Olympics.