who is responsible for the London attacks?

[Bob_the_lost]

Of course I will wait for the trial. But it looks pretty damn overwhelming from where I'm standing.

Obviously it's a stich up though, as the bloke says he didn't do it, so all your evidence is irrelevant.

 

[Jazzz]

Do you think suicide bombers have horns and tails? Any cult member starts off as somebody's son or daughter, somebody's partner or friend. That doesn't preclude them from being part of a cult. How many neighbours have said ' oh , he seemed such a nice man?' after the murderer is arrested? How many rapists wives say 'But he'd never do that?' Bin Laden has a wife and many children. The point has already been made about the banality of evil.It is shockign that young British men wanted to blow themselves up and take many of us with them less than a month ago. But that is what they did. I am truly surprised, Dr J that you of all people, who seem to have no difficulty believing 6 unbelievable things before breakfast ( to misquote Lewis Carroll) should find that difficult to believe.

If you get on a train with a bomb, 2 weeks to the day after 52 people were blown up and 700 injured by people who got on trains with bombs , and the bombs are made in the same style as the ones that went off, and the components of further bombs are found a car linked to you and your mates, a flat linked to you is a bomb factory, and a nail bomb is found near another flat linked to your group, and you are known to have held extremist views, and Finsbury Park Mosque where you used to hang out has tried frantically to distance itself from your and your friend's extremist views, and you are caught on CCTV leaving said bombs, primed to explode, on tubes and buses in an pretty exact replica of the events a fortnight before...and then looking startled when they fail to go off because of what seems like a FUCKING LUCKY BREAK...and then go into hiding ...are you telling me that you expect that to be dismissed as some kind of student wheeze?

Of course his lawyer is going to come up with some attempt at mitigating bollocks, that is her job. And of course, you, the failed bomber, who delivered a forensic bonanza to the police are going to bluster and lie and change your story.

Of course I will wait for the trial. But it looks pretty damn overwhelming from where I'm standing.

As I understood it suicide bombers would always have the support of their families - that was the point about the stunned friends/pregnant girlfriends, not that they come from families.

The theory that the 7/7 bombers were 'duped' and not suicide bombers is one that we know the police were considering, so you should hardly be shouting 'impossible thing before breakfast' at me for that one.

I don't want to get into a row over the details of the latter part of your post but let me say this: staging a terror attack causing mass panic and disruption, whether potentially fatal or not, is no 'student wheeze' and I beg you not to put such words in my mouth.

 

[tarannau]

As I understood it suicide bombers would always have the support of their families - that was the point about the stunned friends/pregnant girlfriends, not that they come from families.
.

Where do you get these assumptions from? Is there a special parental consent form that suicide bombers have to fill in or something?

Authoratative sounding, but I'm guessing you're jumping to ridiculous conclusions on the shakiest of tales again.

 

[Bob_the_lost]

The theory that the 7/7 bombers were 'duped' and not suicide bombers is one that we know the police were considering, so you should hardly be shouting 'impossible thing before breakfast' at me for that one.

Yes, but as covered earlier they have a duty to examine every possibility, your link does not say that they think it's likely, or that they are doing anything other than crossing the t's and dotting the j's

There is little to no evidence to support such a theory at the moment.

 

[EuroDude2006]

According to a poll in the UK, 62% of Britons believe the Iraq war was a "contributory factor" in leading to the bombings. The vast majority of British people (66%) opposed the Iraq war and continue to do so. Blair's Labour party fell from 41% of the vote in 2001 to 36% in the 2005 General Election- compared to 33% for the Conservative opposition. The 3rd party, the Liberal Democrats, rose from 17% to 24%, almost totally at the expense of Labour. So 64% of people voted against the current British Government - almost entirely because of Iraq. The British people believe there are no WMD and that the war was unnecessary.

It's easy to say that terrorists are personally responsible for their actions. But the underlying question is what reason is there that thousands and thousands join these groups. People just do not like foreigners occupying their country. This is the underlying reason I am afraid.

Now some Americans may respond that 911 and the USS Cole, and the Embassy Bombings in Africa were before Iraq, which is true. But US bias towards Israel e.g. refusal to use leverage to force progress towards Palestinian independence, arming/funding them to the teeth is by far the most decisive factor in generating anti-American feeling in the Muslim world. Americans may respond that to take a more "honest broker/neutral" role would be to "give in to terrorists". I personally see it differently as a European. Certain ends are right or wrong anyway. The methods some use to achieve them may be wrong - and obviously bombing innocent civilians is - but that doesn't make the goals malign.

The British weren't being bombed by Islamic terrorists before the war in Iraq. This confirms me in my suspicions of why it happened. Obviously I condemn it, but I stand by what I have said. I am not making excuses for the bombers. Rather I am giving explanations. The Russians would do well to learn from this that they must bring an end to the war on Chechnya or they are bringing further trouble on themselves.

 

[Streathamite]

As I understood it suicide bombers would always have the support of their families - that was the point about the stunned friends/pregnant girlfriends, not that they come from families.

The theory that the 7/7 bombers were 'duped' and not suicide bombers is one that we know the police were considering, so you should hardly be shouting 'impossible thing before breakfast' at me for that one.

I don't want to get into a row over the details of the latter part of your post but let me say this: staging a terror attack causing mass panic and disruption, whether potentially fatal or not, is no 'student wheeze' and I beg you not to put such words in my mouth.

aren't you presuming rather a large amount of 'insider knowledge' about what was going through these individuals' minds? because that is all that that particular issue boils down to!

 

[Streathamite]

'I hardly know anything. They only gave me a rucksack to carry on the tube in London. We wanted to stage an attack, but only as a show. Who gave me the explosive? I don't know. I didn't know him. I don't remember. '

This sounds highly plausible to me.

sure it does...if you have an IQ of c.22. There is NO WAY anyone would fall for that 2 weeks after a highly publicised suicide bombing-by-rucksack!

 

[Pickman's model]

sure it does...if you have an IQ of c.22. There is NO WAY anyone would fall for that 2 weeks after a highly publicised suicide bombing-by-rucksack!

have you asked rebel warrior?

until then, the fat lady is just warming up.

 

[exosculate]

sure it does...if you have an IQ of c.22. There is NO WAY anyone would fall for that 2 weeks after a highly publicised suicide bombing-by-rucksack!

I would have trouble believing it if there was not a previously contextual example.

 

[editor]

As I understood it suicide bombers would always have the support of their families - that was the point about the stunned friends/pregnant girlfriends, not that they come from families.

And after twenty seconds on google:

Inside the Mind of an Iraqi Suicide Bomber

Like other Iraqis who have joined extremist religious groups during the insurgency, Marwan severed connections with his family when he joined up.

He says he will call them once before his suicide mission to say goodbye. Even though one of his brothers fights for another insurgent group and other siblings help the rebels with money and shelter, he says they all believe he has gone too far. "My family are not happy with my choice," he says. "But they know they can't change my path."

Source: Jul. 04, 2005 TIME magazine

Why do you keep on making stupid claims that you can't even be bothered to research, DrJ?

 

[exosculate]

have you asked rebel warrior?

until then, the fat lady is just warming up.

Fat man surely?

 

[Jo/Joe]

He seems to be confused patsy far more than suicide bomber

You seem desperate to clear these people of as much responsibility as possible DrJ. Why is that? Is it to shore up your preconceived theory that UK intelligence were behind it? The statement of denial by that guy is clear bullshit. Take a rucksack to London two weeks after the previous bombing and he's confused? He's admitted to attempting to cause an explosion anyway, he's just now trying to wriggle out of full responsibility for what might have happened.

 

[Streathamite]

have you asked rebel warrior?

until then, the fat lady is just warming up.

 

[nino_savatte]

hahahaha.

where d'you stand politically is you aren't a damp liberal?

Does it matter? Quite honestly I get a great deal of pleasure watching you speculate....and get it soooooo wrong.

 

[kyser_soze]

Jo/Joe does raise a valid point Dr J - why are you so convinced that this was masterminded by the State and not an actual terrorist attack by people motivated by the Iraq qar or other issues?

Eurodude...top post except for one thing - not one of the bombers (AFAIK) is from Iraq or has relatives/connections there (please forgive me if that's incorrect) and are in fact all resident/domiciled in the UK so altho the link between the Iraq occupation is there, these people aren't doing it because 'their' country is occupied...

 

[TeeJay]

Surely the 21/7 bombers would deny being linked to the 7/7 attacks in order to get a lighter sentence and to protect their networks and other cells?

The whole point of terrorist "cells" is that they aren't directly connected nor do they have knowledge of each other, so catching one cell won't compromise others. Furthermore, the 'footsoldiers' may have their own motivations, limited understanding of what they are being asked to do and not even know the connections of any 'controller' they have. For example it is possible that many of the 9/11 hijackers didn't know that the planes were going to be flown into buildings: many of them (ie not the pilots) were young guys with 'clean' records. Of course this is all speculation, and in no way suggests that MI6/CIA/lizards were involved (although if someone suggested that rogue elements in the Pakistani, Saudi etc military are connected I would find it a bit more believabe).

 

[TeeJay]

All I can do is urge you to be very cautious with conclusions here.

Damn! Someone has been 'reprogramming' the Doctor!

 

[TeeJay]

Honestly, I can scarcely believe the way people are refusing to countenance any suggestion that the events of 21/7 could be anything other than a 'suicide' attack, when for a start, no-one died!

An *attempted* suicide attack.

 

[TeeJay]

Blair's Labour party fell from 41% of the vote in 2001 to 36% in the 2005 General Election- compared to 33% for the Conservative opposition. The 3rd party, the Liberal Democrats, rose from 17% to 24%, almost totally at the expense of Labour. So 64% of people voted against the current British Government - almost entirely because of Iraq.

You are counting Conservative votes as votes against Iraq? Surely someone could say that (pro-war) Lab. + (pro-war) Con. = 69% ?

 

[exosculate]

You are counting Conservative votes as votes against Iraq? Surely someone could say that (pro-war) Lab. + (pro-war) Con. = 69% ?

Cant help but agree with that.

 

[EuroDude2006]

You are counting Conservative votes as votes against Iraq? Surely someone could say that (pro-war) Lab. + (pro-war) Con. = 69% ?

People weren't voting on the Iraq war alone. However, there hasn't been a single poll in the past year or 2 showing more people for the Iraq war than against. But the decline in the Labour vote was obviously because of Iraq.

Blair was unpopular because of the war, but not quite unpopular enough to put the still-unpopular Conservatives in.

 

[Jazzz]

We have nothing but circumstantial associations with 7/7 and the words of the state (which we should have learnt not to trust, after all the lies) to suggest that the 21/7 bombers wanted to kill anyone let alone themselves.

For instance, who can Muktar Ibrahim possibly be trying to kill here? It's an empty top deck! And if those timings are right he wasn't on the bus when it went off.

 

[dylanredefined]

So we should just let them go .Dr jazz you come up with some crap its just a shame none of these fuckers got a head full of lead unlike the poor brazilian .

 

[exosculate]

People weren't voting on the Iraq war alone. However, there hasn't been a single poll in the past year or 2 showing more people for the Iraq war than against. But the decline in the Labour vote was obviously because of Iraq.

Blair was unpopular because of the war, but not quite unpopular enough to put the still-unpopular Conservatives in.

And the increase in the Tory vote was because they were also in favour of the war?

You don't make sense mate.

 

[Jazzz]

So we should just let them go

where the fuck did I say that?

 

[editor]

where the fuck did I say that?

What's the Filipino guy got to do with the London bombings, please?

 

[EuroDude2006]

And the increase in the Tory vote was because they were also in favour of the war?

You don't make sense mate.

The Tory vote stayed the same in % terms i.e. 33% as in 2001.

But under the Straight Vote electoral system, a party can gain seats as a result of a split vote between other parties. Hence, a rise in the Liberal Democrat vote at Labour's expense, puts Conservatives in Parliament, without the latter increasing their vote.

An electoral system (STV-PR) like the Irish one is much fairer.

 

[dylanredefined]

Sorry but you seem to implied they were not guilty Ill wait for the trial
dont care if they were sucide bombers or just wanting to scare people its just a shame they were n't shot dead too many religious nutters around imho.

 

[slaar]

We have nothing but circumstantial associations with 7/7 and the words of the state (which we should have learnt not to trust, after all the lies) to suggest that the 21/7 bombers wanted to kill anyone let alone themselves.

For instance, who can Muktar Ibrahim possibly be trying to kill here? It's an empty top deck! And if those timings are right he wasn't on the bus when it went off.

That photo was 15 minutes before the bomb went off, it's not rocket science to suppose people got on bearing in mind the bus was heading towards the centre of town. As for the second point, if you had read any of the news on this, rather than making up stories, you'd know he left the bomb on a timer and got off the bus.

Facts please.

 

[EuroDude2006]

http://www.tvnz.co.nz/view/page/423466/598673

Two-thirds of Britons think the July 7 bombings in London were linked to Prime Minister Tony Blair's support for the US-led invasion of Iraq, according to a poll published on Tuesday.

The ICM survey for the Guardian newspaper found 33% of Britons believe Blair bears "a lot" of responsibility for the London bombings and a further 31% "a little".

Only 28% of those polled said Iraq and the London bombings were not connected.

Blair has rejected any link between Iraq and the blasts which killed 56 people and wounded hundreds more on three underground trains and a bus in central London.