Ballzor

London Attacks

Another horrible event to add to a long list. I am not quite sure how an American should react to it though. Obviously we show our support any way we can, but with all of the hatred and anger aimed towards us, it really isn't our place to say anything at all. Any Brits out there care to share their opinion?

__________________
Le Berger, Le Mouton, Ce qui vous mangerait? Je ne sais pas. -let it all drop cause fuck it I guess we lost-
<Danao>I am french so excuse my langage..
<Krost> ^^
<Krost> I'm American so excuse my president.

Rekna

The big question is who is responsible. If it is Al Queda how successfull has the war on terror been?

samcol

This is the key question. Who is responsible and who benefits? Time will tell I suppose.

DJ Happy

Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for it.

I must say I'm surprised there hasn't been much response to it on this board.

the_marq

There's another thread... This one will probably be merged in time.

__________________
The Truth:

Johnny Cash could have kicked Bruce Lee's ass if he wanted to.

#3 in a series

ShaniFaye

Its in General Discussion

right here http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=91666

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

Ballzor

I looked through all of the most recent threads but didn't see anything, so by all means merge away.

Al Qaeda has supposively claimed responsability, but who knows these days. I wonder how often terrorist organizations take claim for attacks they had nothing to do with just for the free press.

By the way, reports again are shifting left and right, some are saying 40 dead, others are saying its only 2.

__________________
Le Berger, Le Mouton, Ce qui vous mangerait? Je ne sais pas. -let it all drop cause fuck it I guess we lost-
<Danao>I am french so excuse my langage..
<Krost> ^^
<Krost> I'm American so excuse my president.

Charlatan

The report that says 2 was early on... they haven't even begun to take the dead from King's Cross and other tube stations. They have been rescuing the living first.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

zen_tom

You should react in the same way any human being would react when they learn about the distress of another, be they English, American, Palestinian, Israeli or Iraqi.

Now is not the time to be making political judgements.

roachboy

listening to radio 5 for information.
hell of a thing to encounter first thing in the morning.

apparently, folk there are less willing to simply assume al qeada did this than folk seem to be here: the organization claiming responsibility presents itself on a website as being something like a secret organization within al qaeada--bombs left on the tube and on a bus--it could have been anyone, really.

usually, if you think about it, there is a clear symbolic message to such attacks and it entails no disprespect to anyone hurt or killed to wonder about this from the outset--because if we do not think about this early on we will find ourselves watching the Official Interpretation closing over us.

it is a curious bit of timing.
one objective might have been to shake up the g8 simply to show that it can be done.
the olympics?

the type of action indicates a small group with minimal resources.

personally, i am not at all sure about the al qeada linkage.
i still find myself thinking that al qaeada and the bush administration are like two dysfunctional people in a violent codependent relationship. i am both curious and apprehensive about the type and amount of political capital the latter will attempt to extract from the folk who were killed or died. if it is al qeada behind this, they have found their status battered and would probably like being reinvigorated as public enemy number 1. the administration would probably in their heart of hearts like nothing better than an attack in order to start all over again the cycle of ideological production that has worked so well for them so far.

watching as information emerges--waiting for the next phase of this sad affair to unfold--obviously sympathies for the folk killed and injured.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Dbass

The group that has claimed responsibility is not al-qaeda as you might think, but a group that calls itself (I just heard this on the news like 3 minutes ago) the Al-Quaeda Society (or group) of Europe...I haven't heard of them before.
What strikes me as odd is that double decker buses are symbolic but aren't exactly the heart of Britain's economy and spirit. They also, in spite of the horror, weren't as severe as plane crashes to real economic centers...it wasn't even Parliament or Big Ben or those things that have such meaning. I don't mean to offend ANYONE by downplaying the gravity of the situation, but it is perplexing...

Rekna

To invoke fear one doesn't have to do tuns of dammage. All they need to do is show they are coordinated. 8 coordinated attacks across the city invokes much more fear in me then one large attack. A large attack can be done by a single person (look at the Oklahoma city bombing). But a coordinated attack takes planning and strategy.

feelgood

Interesting, the thread for the London attack on Fark.com is turning into one of the biggest flame war I ever seen in my lifetime.

Other than that, I'm interested to see if this is related to winning the olympic bid or the G8 summit.

__________________
Looking out the window, that's an act of war. Staring at my shoes, that's an act of war. Committing an act of war? Oh you better believe that's an act of war

powerclown

Its like a sick, twisted dream isnt it?

"The worst attack on London since the second world war"

Intelligence Failure?
Conspiracy against Islam?
Britain: Evil Empire?
Civil Liberties Violated?
Address Underlying Problems?
Were Jews Warned to Leave the Subway?
Questionable Airplane Impact Trajectories?
Bush Responsible for This for not Capturing Bin Laden?
Oppressed Freedom Fighters - Never Terrorists?
Israeli Intelligence Secretly Behind This?
War on Terror Lost?
Guantanamo Bay Really A Gulag?
All The G8's Fault?
Jihad - Reality or NeoCon Wet Dream?
.
.
.
I will be very, very, very curious to see the BRITISH response to this...

Nirvana

it just seems as more and more time passes by, and even though we are more vigilant, so are these bastards.

roachboy

you can see quite alot of responses if you simply look at messageboards set up by various newspapers: the guardian has one going as does the washington post.

what i have been seeing is a very different type of response from 2001--here, many many folk are laying the whole thing on tony blair and bush, in the lap of their absurd "war on terror" and---in particular---the misbegotten colonial adventure in iraq.

i assume that american tv networks will be working hard to prevent that kind of response from taking too much shape publicly. it'd be hard to maintain what remains of the support for bushworld if folk were able to stray and think in more complex terms about what this action entails. i am sure that the bushsquad is going to milk this for all its worth.

but have a look for yourself. here for example:
http://forums.washingtonpost.com/wpf...ges?msg=3366.1

here, with links to blogs with photos:
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Explosio..._across_London

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

powerclown

I love it! Now it's Blair's fault too! Never the people who actually committed the crime.

You have a new word to add to you're rhetoric now, rb.

"blairworld"

ganon

my own thoughts are that the people responsible are the ones who placed the bombs. there are so many other ways to voice your desires and opinions in this world besides using violence against innocent civilians.

__________________
"My give up, my give up." - Jar Jar Binks

Pacifier

"What if" the UK wouldn't be a part of the coalition of the willing?

This attack is an attack in the context of the "war on terror", it was clear that ALKaida would try to strike back.
They have made Iraq a battleground and now trying to do some "moral bombing", not very surprisinly

__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
— Albert Einstein

powerclown

Maybe, but is it JUSTIFIED?
Is blowing up civilians a justifiable response to anything?

Nevermind, I'm horrified of the ensuing rationalizations.

Pacifier

Of course not, willfulling targeting civillians is never justified

__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
— Albert Einstein

snowy

What I find interesting is that security in London was supposed to be on a high alert because of the upcoming G8 summit in Gleneagles, Scotland, and yet this happened. Perhaps this will push us to find more holes in our national security systems (both Britain and the US), because clearly if the London Underground can be bombed when security is meant to be high, they're doing something wrong.

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

powerclown

That's secret TFP Politics code for something else, eh?

Dragonlich

What I've seen on the news about security in the underground was aimed mostly at the "normal" terrorists: people who want to leave bombs that explode later (i.e. non-suicide bombers). There's pretty much no way to leave a bag around without it being noticed.

...but, suicide bombers are different: they don't want to leave bombs behind, they *are* the bombs. There's pretty much no way of stopping them. If you were to discover them before they reach their destination, they'll simply (try to) blow themselves up where they are. The result will be death and destruction anyway.

I dunno how we could possibly stop them once they're on their way. Nothing except *very* itchy trigger fingers...

Charlatan

Do we know that they were suicide bombers yet?

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Ballzor

Political Judgements have nothing to do with the nature of my original post. The fact that we live in a world where politics and the hatred therein could hinder compassion and pity for another is more my approach. Whether you or I like it or not, the politics of this event will be in discussion for months.

The relationship between British citizens and American citizens was already at a strain beforehand, but now it is very possible that things could turn ugly between our two nations. One (not myself of course) could argue the point that America started a war and now other countries have to suffer the consequences. Thought it is just as possible that the English will see this as a sign that terrorism must be stopped and could weild us more support. Its anybodies ball game, again, a Brit's opinion would be the only way to tell.

I don't think there is a better response for my arguement then this zen_tom.

__________________
Le Berger, Le Mouton, Ce qui vous mangerait? Je ne sais pas. -let it all drop cause fuck it I guess we lost-
<Danao>I am french so excuse my langage..
<Krost> ^^
<Krost> I'm American so excuse my president.

snowy

So no, we can't reach a conclusion that they were suicide bombers. It will be interesting to see what precisely they were though.

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

host

Oh....our ole friend, DHS, dusts it's color coded warning level off and trots it out. Are these the last days before we fully embrace "the safety of power"?
Before we gladly and willing trade civilian law for martial law?
The message seems to be that, even with the heightened state of national security and alert that hosting the G8 summit brings in these troubled times, the prominent English speaking nation with the most experience dealing with terrorism at home, the UK, could not provide a safe and secure commute to the residents of it's largest city. Are you observing this America ? What can we do to better insure our safety, protect our families our children ? It was apparently too soon to present another lesson to the American people at home, concerning the danger of not fully embracing "the security of power".

I fear for my country, our freedoms, and I understand that our government "hates us for our freedom". I fear this much more than I fear "terrurrrrr".
In Sept., 2004 polling revealed that more than 50 percent of NYC residents polled believed that the U.S. administration at minimum had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks and failed to act on it with the intent of preventing the attacks. Enough people signed a petition to influence NY state Atty General Elliott Spitzer to publicly announce that he would conduct an independent investigation of the 9/11 attacks. People in U.S. cities did not vote as a majority for Bush or other RNC sponsered political candidates. They do, however, ride subways and other mass transit. What is the most effective way to persuade them to vote for the next "war president" and "security party" candidates ?

Author Doris Colmes has seen it all before, and she explains my concerns about the U.S. response to terrorist attacks much better than I ever could.

zen_tom

Ballzor, I don't know where you get the idea that there is British hatred and anger against the US - Yes, there is a reasoned opposition to the foreign policy being conducted by the Allies in Iraq and elsewhere, but that opposition resides within the US as well, it is certainly not unique to the UK, nor is it, where it exists, directed solely at the US. The UK government gets it’s fair share of stick as well.

I work with both US and British citizens on a daily basis, and fail to see this 'strained' relationship you refer to. If anything, the UK and US relationship has been particularly strong recently in regards to events in Europe, and the continued cooperation between governments. I just don't recognise what you're talking about. The British public reelected the largely pro-Bush Tony Blair back into government only a month or so ago, I think if they'd been full of anti-US hatred and anger, that Blair may have not been so readily returned to Downing Street.

Yes, there will always be criticism of controversial policies and decisions, but that's freedom. Don't misinterpret considered criticism for 'hatred and anger', reserve that for the perpetrators of these horrible acts.

snowy

That's the thing...no matter what we do, no matter how secure we think we are, no matter how many preventative measures we take (limiting personal freedoms, heightened security, more observation) these people are still going to find weaknesses in the system and exploit them. Honestly, there isn't a whole lot we can do to better ensure our safety without trodding on a few amendments.

We can, however, continue to live our lives in a normal fashion despite the presence and possibility of terrorism. We can, however, continue to improve and test the existing systems of security. But we cannot expect to catch anything and everything terrorist-related. The best thing we can do is be prepared and keep our emergency response systems in peak shape while hoping that something like this never happens again (unlikely though that may be).

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

host

The UK did not issue a national security ID to it's residents even when it was threatened with IRA terrorists and further in the past, the darkest days of war against the Nazis. Now, they implement an ID in the name of national security. Will this ID be required to purchase admission to mass transit soon?

I recall the images of blast debris and the carcasses of the dead horses of the ceremonial queen's guard in the streets of London in the aftermath of an IRA bombing, years ago. The queen's cousin, WWII commander Lord Montbatten was killed in the IRA bombing of his yacht, and Britain soldiered on.....individual freedoms intact.

I visited the London Tubes website, and under the heading of "safety and security" there was only info about police efforts to curb crime. There was no demand for info about terrorist security precautions. That will change now.

The UK has more security cameras in place per square mile than anywhere else. There is news that the London Tubes were about to receive a major cctv camera and security communications modernization. Tricky, evil terrorists managed to proceed undetected on existing surveillance cameras to plant their bombs during a heightened pre-G8 security environment, and they did their deed before new surveillance cameras were installed in the tube system. How do they come to be sooooo capable?

roachboy

powerclown:

you made that up.

i would not have made this move first because i see nothing parallel in england to the ways in which the right uses the particular prominence of television of organize public opinion.
there is certainly nothing similar in the kind of absurd loyalty you see amongst american conservatives toward the Leader.
third, for me bushworld is primarily a term used to designate the tendency within american conservative mode of argument to split away from the reality that other people know about and to replace it with this bizarre self-referential, self-confirming political space. i think that is a particularly american thing at the moment--of course there have been parallel uses of mass media to incite more murderous variants of this in the past (april-june 1994 anyone?)--but in the states, bushworld is new and relies specifically and heavily on television (and to a lesser extent radio--a decade ago it was the other way around)--and on the specific uses that americans make of their televisions.

so no, powerclown, i would not use the term even if i were inclined to.
perhaps you should consider modulating your new persona as witty gadfly.


but i think there are some interesting things going on--if you judge by the various webforums that are having conversations about this, you can see (1) that this is bringing lots of folk in two very different political contexts into direct contact with each other and that is opening onto a big, diffuse conflict over how these events are to be interpreted. (2) what is particularly interesting within that is the inability of american conservative perspectives--like ballzor's for example--to acquire purchase. the discourse that was able to channel 9/11/2001 is no longer effective in the states---whether it would become so were there an attack on the states itself is an open question, the possible answers to which are pretty horrifying---and is encountering a sense of how limited/specific that view really is in the world. american conservative discourse cannot control the debate on this. i find that interesting.

that this would result in flamewars is not a particular surprise, frankly.

but no-one not already far far to the right appears to be buying the linkage between iraq and the so-called "war on terror"--but they are making a link between iraq and these attacks, insofar as to policies of tony blair have set london up to be a target despite the very powerful opposition to those policies at home.
which would indicate that folk are seeing in the misbegotten colonial war in iraq the cause of these attacks.
which would in turn open up the possibility of thinking about these events not in terms of the fatuous "they hate us and must be stopped" pseudo-thinking that has done so much work since 9/11, but rather in terms of causal possibilities that really would put bushworld on the spot.

because i have not been watching american television, i do not know what i am supposed to think about this. but the webforum conflicts are much more interesting than watching the reactionary spin machine kick into gear.

it is obvious that the bush people would prefer to avoid this entire line of questioning/argument and so are trapped trying to make a rather pathetic argument for linking this to the Eternal Enemy of "terrorism"....witness rice's bland statement.

it is a very complex, very interesting moment to be watching webforums.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

ShaniFaye

To me...London being attacked was always a "when" not an if....I've been waiting for it since Blair backed us up after 9/11

__________________
I want the diabetic plan that comes with rollover carbs. I dont like the unused one expiring at midnite!!

stevo

rb, you're a historian. how can you expect such change to take place in a few short years? Did you think an end to terror would come by now? Its a long battle, a long war, how can you expect an end to come soon?

Its sad, but hardly unexpected. We will be fighting them for a long time to come.

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

roachboy

stevo: for what it's worth, i think you misunderstood which direction i was trying to go with this--i don't necessarily see an "essence" to "terrorism" that could be used to say anything meaningful about the attack(s) in london this morning. the whole idea of terrorism as a free-floating, context-independent variable is a particular construction, one that has been worked out and used endlessly by the bush administration and its far right allies to prop up this administration, to justify particular types of policies both domestically and internationally.

what i was trying to point to is the pounding that i see this particular construction of the notion of "terrorism" taking in webforum after webforum that i have been cruising through today--i think in part because this is bringing two very different political cultures (if you like) into contact with each other across these attacks--what is interesting is that bushdiscourse cannot control the debate, cannot even be seen to coherent frame the debate about these attacks. that is what i find interesting--the features of the administrations discourse of "the war on terror" is something that i only find interesting because it is repeated so much--i don't think it helps understand anything--but it does keep people afraid and dependent.

what i do see is lots of really pissy exchanges developing out of this inability to sound or be coherent about these attacks on the basis of the dominant conservative framing of the question.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

powerclown

Wonderful. So these types of attacks ARE legitimate after all. Just another terrorist attack to be filed away under "legitimate forms of political dissent".

To be so blase, so firm in the belief that these people 'had whats coming to them' is pure stubborness. I understand the reasoning, but I don't accept it. If you have a beef, I can't think of a less productive way to address it than this.

roachboy

powerclown: would you perhaps consider abandoning your tack of the day and stop making stuff up about what i am saying. it is getting really annoying. i have no problem debating with you at all, but this is neither good for the whole civility thing nor helpful in terms of what i or anyone else might be saying.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Pacifier

That conclusion is bollocks.
The politics of Blair have led to these attacks, but that doesn't make them legitimate.
Thas is just a try to explain the reason and the mindset behind those attacks. The usual "those terrorists are just cray massmurders" is dumb and will ofer us no solution, no insight and no strategy to prevent those attacks. Those kind of statements are useless, if not dangerous.

__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
— Albert Einstein

pan6467

People today is a day to mourn...... show some freaking respect and take a day off turning this into politics and partisan drivel.

People lost lives, families and loved ones and you want to argue today over politics..... show respect there's time for politics and time to just mourn and blame those that are responsible not each other because we don't agree on politics.

The right blaming the left and the left blaming the right freaking accomplishes nothing today except to say, "seeeeeee what the other side leads to."

We have fucking ignorant arseholes killing innocent people and creating mayhem and you're worried about political advantages and stances today?

Aren't we divided enough, can't we stand united today and mourn the loss and find compassion.

The terrorists thrive on our feasting on each other, causing more hatreds and anger directed at someone else (i.e. the opposing political party) and not blaming them.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

powerclown

If I misinterpreted your Blair statement, I apologize. At the very least, it is a bizarre way to characterize events.

The Universal Bulletin Board Communication Discrepancy bug, perhaps.