open Democracy News Analysis - bombings in London, - Comments

Neocynic on "bombings in London"

Neocynic — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:43:45 +0100

brolly3: It is amusing that when the faith-based patriots are compelled to look in the mirror and confront callous disregard for the loss of human life, -when it applies to their dead (the 50 in London and the 1,700 troops in Iraq), -their rhetoric soars regarding the sanctity of human life in inverse proportion to when it applies to 25,000 innocent civillian casaulties ("collateral damage"). Double standards are for criminals, who refuse to obey any notion of the rule of law, and for cowards, who lack the courage of their professed convictions. The Bush cultists are both.

brolly3 on "bombings in London"

brolly3 — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:04:51 +0100

neocynic, No wonder why the Bush *** lickers hate you. They simply cannot bear the truth. No doubt you will be the recipient of more of their usual convoluted and mendacious nonsense.

Neocynic on "bombings in London"

Neocynic — Wed, 20 Jul 2005 08:29:45 +0100

Callous disregard for Iraqi civillian losses only invites our callous disregard for the dead in London, and indeed, callous disregard for US war dead (Something the Bush admin is already practising.) It is amazing some here fail to see how so very lost is the war in Iraq. The US and UK are planning to split mid-2006, and are missing nothing but a white flag to signal the absolute failure of the fiasco. All in vain. The simple fact is that the insurgents, being at home, have no where to go: either to complete victory, or death. Also, with God inspiring their unlimited supply of suicide bombers, versus US troops who are inspired by nothing but hefty signing bonuses, one insurgent is equal to 100 invaders. And you can make that 500 when the troops realize they are leaving in mid-2006, with nothing to show for their efforts (remember Kerry's Vietnam War-era testimony: who will be asked to die last for a mistake?).

Joeanna Nee on "bombings in London"

Joeanna Nee — Thu, 14 Jul 2005 23:17:22 +0100

Damn Straight mistah! You can lead even a stupid horse to water, but you cant make it drink. Best to you as well. Joeanna

TimLFrancis on "bombings in London"

TimLFrancis — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 02:49:22 +0100

Joeanna, And you really do like to have the last word. [smile] Take care, Tim

Joeanna Nee on "bombings in London"

Joeanna Nee — Wed, 13 Jul 2005 01:31:26 +0100

Dear Tim, First ... whatever, you want to just pick a fight, Ive explained what I meant, you dont get it, its all good. Good luck to you Tim, in where ever life leads you. May the winds always be to your back. Courtney, Not my point, it just occured, feeding my infant, I actually thought of many of you folks from the UK, was frought with worry and I did say where I heard it from, expressed that I thought they were giving information prematurely that may cause many to panic. So, I dont see your point, I guess being concerned for others isnt really appropriate here. Wow, you havent a clue to what I was trying to say. So, tell me Courtney, whats the point anymore. (Rhetorical, dont bother) Joeanna

Courtney Hamilton on "bombings in London"

Courtney Hamilton — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 08:54:52 +0100

Joeanne Nee You really need to have some hard evidence to say something like that. Regardless of where you heard it. You can't just repeat something you've heard without any facts to back it up. This is way I seldom read posts on opendemocracy, because some people think it's ok to be cavalier with the facts about issues and events they have strong opinions on. Not only have you just regergatated false information, you defended it as though it was good currency. One small piece of advice, question everything before you start believing it - and before you post wild and inaccurate statements, ask yourself one more question 'where's the evidence'?

brolly3 on "bombings in London"

brolly3 — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 03:32:42 +0100

DaveGood, I just want to set the record straight and at the same time show what a deceitful bugger rickgibsonlaw is. I said in a previous post that when I lived in Poland in the mid 1990's I spoke to many Poles who were of middle age. I specifically asked them whether they were better off than they were under the old regime. Most expressed the view that under Communism or whatever way one wants to describe their past economic order, they had a welfare cushion which they said was withering away under the free market system that had largely replaced it. Many had also lost their jobs as so many State enterprises had closed. Those aged between forty and sixty that were unemployed had little or no opportunity for retraining and also had their family responsibilities to think of. The people who were optimistic were the younger generation that had time on their side.No one denied that there were not more goods in the shops but this was not the be all and end all for many. rickgibsonlaw has several times deliberatly misrepresented my views by asserting that I had said that Poland was better off under Communism. I was very clear that I was referring to an older generation and I particulary mentioned those that were unemployed as being the most pessimistic. This man is a liar who is always trying to put words into people's mouths and accusing them of hiding their real views. I asked him who the hell he thought he was, that people would be afraid to say what they meant. He is an arrogant and tricky individual and is continually trying to set one up. He has a buyllying and sarcastic tone and is hardly worth responding to. OD gets some weirdos on it and they are usually from the hard right. I think that rick has a virility complex. Message was edited by: brolly3 Message was edited by: brolly3

DaveGood on "bombings in London"

DaveGood — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:33:17 +0100

Richgibsonlaw ok.... This has to be quick.... it's late and I'm drunk.... Rick..... here's the problem ( Mine and yours..... I have a solution to mine...... let's see if you CAN find a solution to yours)..... I have opposed Saddam Hussien since the eighties.... I was campaigning ( Along with thousands of others around the world) to have him removed and brought to trial in front of some sort of international tribunal from the time he gassed his own people...... Now bear in mind this was well before the internet.... So I was doing this through phonecalls and mail...... Who did i write to? Who did I phone? Who did I plead with? Guess what.... Conservative governments on your side of the pond, and mine..... who assured me blandly there was no need for concern..,.. there was no proof Saddam either had weapons of mass destruction or had ever used them..... then a few months later Donald Rumsfeld went to Baghdad, gladhanded Saddam, handed him a huge gobbet of American tax payers money....... and arranged the delivery of more WMD which he was later to claim Saddam never had any right to own.... ( I've still got the video clip of this on my pc.... want to see it?. The fact is Rick, I don't trust America anymore.....It is blatantly dishonest.... I don't trust it's right wing (and to us... the democrats look right wing).... Dubya has lied, lied, and lied again, then lied some more..... no-one .... no-one outside of America itself..... now regards the word of any senior American as haveing any value......... we'd all rather you just piss off and leave the rest of us to try and deal with the f*cking shambles you have left us. We'll try and get something done about global climate destruction for example.....something we can't do with Dubya sitting at the table blocking every move the other 95 per cent of humanity want to make. But we can't do sod all until you guys implode..... which shouldn't be too long now considering the 2.3 billion dollars you are haveing to borrow every day from the rest of us just to keep yourselves going and your hyper-rich tax-free.. By the way..... Do you really consider it vital.... as the worlds only, unchallenged super-power ..... to have a military budget bigger then the rest of the world combined? ( Bear in mind, you cannot pay for it...... You are relying on daily loans from China to keep you afloat right now!) And consider this, the Bush administration has described the Spanish, the French, the Germans as Gutless cowards...... so guess how much support you will get from the European Union in the Future? Night night DaveGood. PS.... I think I'm beginning to get a grasp of exactly what your "ideological stance" is...... and I'm certain you have a grasp of mine..... this doesn't have to make us enemies.... though it probably will....... and should it do so,...... my distress....., on a scale of 1 to 10?..... You can rank as "Mild" I'll say this..... based on what I have read of your writings so far I expect to challenge and force you to justify everything you post here..... and I fully expect you to do the same to me..... I'm willing to awknowledeg at the outset though.... before we pull our knives fron our boots and get serious.... All other things being equal?..... I'd buy you a beer and listen to your jokes:) Goodnight

rickgibsonlaw on "bombings in London"

rickgibsonlaw — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 22:55:54 +0100

Dave: I support Bush's invasion of Iraq. I do so, because I opposed Hussein. I saw him as an evil dictator, who oppressed his own people. I am optimistic that we will see in Iraq a new and democratic government. In my view, the people of Iraq had no chance, until the Coalition power destroyed Hussein. Now, they have a chance for freedom. That is a good thing. You disagree. Why? I have been discussing this issue with a number of people. Frankly, the discussion is often not very useful,because people get very heated, starting throwing personal insults, and, in general,do not rationally explain their opinion. To anticipate somewhat, most of the opponents of the war seem to fall into two categories. First, there are thus who are not necessarily opposed to using military force to overthrow tyrants, but who believe that Bush: (a) did not make a strong enough case to do so here; (b) should not have acted without UN sanction; and (c) has ulterior motives. Second, there are those who simply hate the US, and let that hatred blind them to everything else. I have a suggestion. Instead of focusing on attack, focus on setting out the logic of your views. You think that most people in the world automatically oppose the war. Why? You are talking to someone who disagrees. Another suggestion. Sometimes people just disagree. That is OK. We have a saying here in the US. We call someone an "honest liberal." That means someone who will honestly defend his own position, and who will not pretend to have different positions. In this country,many liberal opinions -- such as opposition to the death penalty --are not popular. Thus, many liberals hide their views beneath phony masks,seeking to court popularity. This is what I dislike about Brolly. He clearly has very strong views. He gives them away when he says things like the Poles were better off under Communism. OK, Brolly is on the Left. Why can't he just say so? Because,then, he would have to defend,and not just attack. That is intellectually lazy and politicaly irresponsible. In my view,if you do not like US policy, fine, give us an alternative. If your alternative is leaving the Husseins of the world in power, then have the honesty to say so. And realize that an implication of your positon is that you are supporting the ongoing oppression of the people subject to the power of such tyrants. In your view -- if this is your view -- the evil of the US acting as it did in Iraq is so great that it outweighs the evils done by Hussein. If that is your view,then be honest about it,and argue for it. Thus far, no one -- most especially Brolly -- has been honest enough to take that position. And if you think that an alternative policy is available that both:(a)gets rid of the Huseeins of the world; and (b) avoids whatever evil you see in US actions, then, hey, lets hear it.

DaveGood on "bombings in London"

DaveGood — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 22:10:24 +0100

Rickgibsonlaw...... Sir, you are of course correct, no-one who comes here and posts can claim they do not bring ideological bagagge and viewpoints with them.... I do so.... even though my ideological viewpoint can best be defined as "Incoherent".... Sometimes I'm not even sure what or why something outrages me until I start to talk or write about it. I'v been a visitor\contributor to this site long since long before Bush announced he was going to invade, conquer and occupy a country one tenth the size of his own.,.... I remember Brolly as being here before I was..... OF course he opposes the so-called Bush Doctrine... what sane human being who is not a paid up neo-con ( 99.9 per cent of humanity) does not? We've all seen it in action..... it's proven to have been catastrophic to all and anything people like me hold dear, such as principled democracy. Give Brolly some slack.... he's been here fighting the good fight ... when people like me have taken months off to go away and do some study and research..... or straightforward relaxing, which in my case means trying out cases of Cabernet Sauvignon. He's someone who see's that the future of the entire Planet is being pissed away and is angry at it. I agree with him.... though I may and do differ on some of the specific causes. He's stood here, often alone, and taken pounding after pounding from people who would cheerfully send your children off to die or be maimed in places like Iraq but won't go there themselves or send anyone they know and care about.... I've seen it. Don't yet know which side of the idealogical fence you sit on...... I will have to go through some of your posts firsts...... But unless you believe you are living in a world.... and on a planet.... where everything is going to turn out just fine and your kids will have a better life then you will...unless you believe that is true...... ( Global climate destruction, peak oil, wars started at the whim of leaders "elected" via fraud, The USA military budget now bigger then the rest of of the planet combined, Human breast milk of the Inuit in Northern Canada so loaded with PCB's that by law it has to be incinerated as a toxic waste product et al.....) Unless you think none of the above is anything to be concerned about.... I would hope you are just as angry ( Ie "Negative")... as he is... Because I am... and I've pissed off more people here then he has because of it. Regards, DaveGood PS..... I do my best to follow the rules and guidelines OD have set....... I respect and honour what they are doing..... but I refuse to automatically pay respect to anyone till they've earned it..... Everyone get's a few tries, a few attempts.... but once it's clear you have not and cannot earn my respect, be you friend or foe..... what you can expect from me is contempt. I have no idea into which category you fall.

rickgibsonlaw on "bombings in London"

rickgibsonlaw — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:33:28 +0100

Brolly and also some others: What is so wrong with having an ideological viewpoint? Obviously, everyone has beliefs, through which they view the world. Most of us have beliefs that resemble those of others, which is not surprising. Why is this shameful to you? As I have said, I have no difficulty with admitting the obvious: my own beliefs fit within certain easy to recognize parameters. So? Why can't you make the same admission. I think I know the answer. You want the license to attack everyone and everything, but you never want to defend. You glory in your role as the scourge of the US, for every flaw you can find,but you never want to have to articulate a coherent alternative. It is easy to attack, because nothing is perfect. Thinking of something better, however, that is hard. Brolly, your problem is simple. You are lazy. It is so much easier to offer up your bits of re-fried left attack -- as if we had not been hearing the same thing for 30 years now -- then it would be to suggest something positive.

John Rhys-Burgess on "bombings in London"

John Rhys-Burgess — Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:43:04 +0100

Why should anyone have been surprised by last Friday's London bombings? The Blair government were repeatedly warned by British intelligence that appeasing the Bush administration and participating in the unlawful invasion of Iraq, would immeasurably increase the risk of terrorist attacks in Britain. Friday's attacks must be condemned but we would do well to remember that such horror is an every day event for most Iraqis. The true test of the new Iraqi government's legitimacy, was the extent to which it allowed foreign troops to continue to occupy its territory. Clearly, the fact that Coalition military forces are still occupying Iraq, show that its government is no more than an American puppet. The escalation in human rights abuses of the most appalling kind is yet another characteristic typical of a U.S. backed regime.

brolly3 on "bombings in London"

brolly3 — Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:18:49 +0100

Eduardo_Ferreira, I think that a lot of people are apprehensive about travelling on London Underground in particular, rather than on buses. The underground has a much more confined space and far more damage can be done when a bomb goes off in one of the tunnels, which are quite deep on some of the Lines. As someone in one of our less right wing newspapers has observed, it isn’t sheer courage and defiance that has made people resume travelling on our Public Transport but necessity. They have jobs to go to and do not have much choice. The Murdoch right wing press and other right wing media are proclaiming that Londoners are showing the same spirit as during the Blitz of 1940/1941, which portrays Londoners as something special and superhuman but the truth is that there is a degree of fear. I suppose that most people are assuming that the ‘terrorists’ will not quickly attempt another attack, just as New York has remained free of a repeat attack for nearly four years. The pro-Government press, which although Blair is supposedly leader of the New Labour Party, is mainly right wing, is praising his speeches as being those of a great war leader. Blair is above all an actor and has now adopted a Churchillian pose. I find some passages of his speeches purely theatrical and consist of ‘hot air’ phrases, which are common to Bush as well, such as “we will prevail” and that the ‘terrorists are trying to destroy our freedom”. The main argument employed by those that assert that Britain’s participation in the invasion of Iraq, is not responsible for the atrocity of 7th July, is that 9/11 happened before Iraq was attacked. How many people buy into this argument is difficult to assess. What is apparent is that the advocates of this view, Government Ministers and new Labour MP’s, are the ones that have the most to lose if an opposite view is taken. To my way of thinking, these people are forgetting the last fifty to one hundred years of Western interference in the Middle East and the Israel/Palestinian conflict which pre-dates 9/11 by several decades. I also believe that the bombing and occupation of Iraq has certainly aggravated the situation and this is supported by some of the more liberal newspaper’s journalists’ views over the last couple of days. They refer to the warning given by British Intelligence in the days leading up to the war, that an invasion would increase the likelihood of terrorist reaction. I must admit to being someone who regards Tony Blair as the ultimate fool. I think his vanity and desire to be centre stage all the time, accounted for him supporting Bush, as he would then appear as the non-American, who had the most influence on the most powerful man in the world, in other words he would gain reflected glory. I also happen to believe that Blair is one of those people who cannot stand up to a single and narrow minded person like Bush. He is too intent on keeping everything on a friendly basis. This somehow coexists with a ruthless streak.

Neocynic on "bombings in London"

Neocynic — Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:54:41 +0100

Fear has been commoditized by the far Right, and it is now a bona fide industry with production goals, cost/benefit analyses, and shareholder dividends. As per The Power of Nightmares and the grand illusion of Al-Queda, hyping the "terrorist" threat is a cheap, cost-effective way of advancing fascist agendas. Business is definitely booming, and if you buy the product, then you too will be sufficiently addled to agree to any "security" measure, not object to any military "incursion", pay any tax, and vote for any politician (How many of the dead voted for Tony Blair?). For the scared, I say: You deserve it, it looks good on you.

bombings in London,

Joeanna Nee — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 13:41:34 +0100

Several Bombs have blown up trains, and a double decker bus. So far, 191 people killed or injured, yet they all the news is saying is that it was a highly professional job, but not coming right out and saying it was from terrorist. Now, I dont know about the rest of you ... but anybody who plants a bunch of bombs is not only a killer, but a terrorist. Doesnt mean that its from Al Queda, it could be someone from anywhere. I just think they should find out before they start speculating. Where's the responsibility in journalism? To all of you who are Londoners that post here: I hope and pray for your safety, as well as friends, families and innocent travelers. Im so sorry for you. Read the rest of this post...