Home > Islamic Terrorists Attack London, Bush Responds

Islamic Terrorists Attack London, Bush Responds

by Open-Publishing - Thursday 7 July 2005
22 comments

Attack-Terrorism Governments USA UK

Londoners, stand fast! Your friend America stands with you in solidarity. We know how you feel, and we promise to continue the fight against global terrorism with resolve and determination.

Speaking from the G-8 Summit, our president highlighted the stark contrast between societies like ours and those who attacked London:

“On the one hand, we have people here who are working to alleviate poverty, to help rid the world of the pandemic of AIDS, working on ways to have a clean environment. And on the other hand, you’ve got people killing innocent people. And the contrast couldn’t be clearer between the intentions and the hearts of those of us who care deeply about human rights and human liberty, and those who kill — those who have got such evil in their heart that they will take the lives of innocent folks.”

President Bush commented further:

”The war on terror goes on. I was most impressed by the resolve of all the leaders in the room. Their resolve is as strong as my resolve. And that is we will not yield to these people, will not yield to the terrorists. We will find them, we will bring them to justice, and at the same time, we will spread an ideology of hope and compassion that will overwhelm their ideology of hate.”

Bush was correct when he suggested the terrorists were motivated by an “ideology of hate”.

Those who attacked London operate under a fanatical, religious doctrine which sanctions the murder of entire groups of “non-believers” (kafur), those who practice different traditions or hold different beliefs. Wahhabism, an extreme and violent interpretation of Islam promoted by clerics in Saudi Arabia, even promotes the killing of other Muslims who don’t uphold the strict interpretation of Wahhabi teaching. Specifically, Wahhabis hold that reverence for God cannot be shared with prophets, saints and other historic figures (polytheism). In their opinion, polytheists (mushrikun), not to mention Christians and Jews, are enemies of Islam and therefore not worthy to live.

To terrorists operating under the Wahhabi doctrine, our two countries, The United Kingdom and The United States, represent the greatest bastions of the kufur (infidels), and should be destroyed. The Al Qaeda training manual explicitly directs members to blowup various types of soft targets located within “godless nations” like England and the U.S.

Bush and Blair understand our countries are engaged in a world war with Wahhabi-inspired terror groups, a war that will determine the future of civilization, no less. They understand that appeasing terror groups will not stop future terrorist attacks. They know that even if the U.S. withdrew tomorrow and Israel made peace with an autonomous Palestinian state, the fundamental grievances of Wahhabi-inspired terror groups would not be resolved. After all, the teachings of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab predate the founding of the United States in 1776 and of Israel in 1948.

We are witnessing a jihad against western ideology, a religious war that would not end if the U.S. withdrew or if Israel made peace with Palestinians. From the fanatical zealot’s perspective, there are only two options for the non-Muslim world: convert or die. The terrorists claim their attack was revenge for the war in Iraq and Israeli occupation, but our leaders weren’t fooled. Bush and Blair know that this fanatical hatred toward the West is rooted in a history that extends beyond the last 100 years, and that the primary, long-term goal of Wahhabi-inspired terror groups like Al Qaeda is to violently replace all world governments with fanatical Islamic regimes.

– Equalizer

Forum posts

  • We, the "coalition of the willing," bomb the crap out of and shoot up Afghanistan and Iraq, leaving countless innocent people in those two countries dead and wounded, and you talk about an "ideology of hate" on the part of the Muslims?!! You should go into a dark corner and hide in shame. You, Mr. or Miss "Equalizer," are not even worth making me sick.

    • That is nonsense. If the coalition wanted to kill innocent Iraqis or Afghans, it could literally flatten every city within those two nations.

      The coalition goes out of its way to help innocent civilians, each day helping to build roads, hospitals and schools.

      Instead you should direct your anger toward the terrorist insurgents who, on an almost daily basis, orchestrate suicide bombings to indiscriminately murder innocent Iraqis.

      By the way, I attributed the “ideology of hate” not to Muslims as a whole, as you conveniently implied, but to a specific, hate-teaching sect within Islam. Please look up Wahhabism, its history in Saudi Arabia, and how its teaching of intolerance has influenced Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

      – Equalizer

    • > "Instead you should direct your anger toward the terrorist insurgents who, on an almost daily basis, orchestrate suicide bombings to indiscriminately murder innocent Iraqis."

      That’s the only part of the Iraq reality that the TV brings to you. The reality "on the ground" is quite different.

    • Equalizer/fertilizer

      In case you have forgotten, the Christian religion is the largest hate group in the U.S.A There are too many examples to name, but you already know hundreds of them yourself so it is not necessary.

    • "Please look up Wahhabism, its history in Saudi Arabia, and how its teaching of intolerance has influenced Bin Laden and Al Qaeda."

      And who grants them power for petrol, you bollock?

    • I have no clue what you are talking about. Christian charities other religious organizations in the U.S. are tremendous sources of compassion and good will. Their outreach programs for homeless people, battered women, runaway teens, etc. have helped millions of people get back on their feet and fix their lives.

      – Equalizer

    • "each day helping to build roads, hospitals and schools"

      In your puppet-like rantings you have succeeded in stumbling upon the true cause for our war on "terrorism". Who is building these roads, hospitals and schools? not the iraqis. How much money are these corporations making? billions. Does this money go to Iraqi businesses and Iraqi people to jump-start their decimated economy? no, it goes to already rich American white guys who just so happen to be intimately connected to the ones who created this war in the first place! This whole war is the biggest money-laundering scheme ever. Do you have any idea of how many billions of dollors have been misplaced since this quagmire started?

      BTW, rebuilding stuff that you have just bombed the crap out of is not noble or something that you should be bragging about.

    • So basically you are suggesting that the Liberation of Iraq was initiated because US construction companies were not busy enough, not profitable enough that they simply needed more building projects. Following your logic, US construction companies somehow forced President Bush and congress to invade Iraq and topple Saddam’s regime only so that they could come in and build some new hospitals and roads and stuff.

      Sorry, that’s too far of a stretch for me.

      – Equalizer

  • As Peter Ustinov put it,

    "Terrorism is the war of the poor and
    war is the terrorism of the rich"

    The only difference between Bush’s cabal and so-called Al Qaeda (if such a thing even exists) is the size of their budgets. They both use the same propaganda, distortion of language, and religion to justify their moral atrocities. Both willingly kill women and children to further their own power and control. This is their world—a place blind with self-loathing that only serves as the ideologic sandbox for their infantile rages against humanity. The only way either side can exist is to depend on the masses to take sides and fall into line as their cannon fodder. As long as people remain ignorant, and drunk on religion and TV, there’s a pretty good chance nothing will change.

    .

    • But the two sides have very different goals.

      After WWII, America occupied Germany and Japan. America’s goal was not to occupy those countries indefinitely or to impose American culture, other than a culture of democracy and personal liberty. Today those two nations are democratic, free societies in which people of many religions may worship in peace.

      Not so with the likes of London’s attackers. They envision a world polar opposite to that of America and Great Briton (and Germany and Japan!). Think of Taliban Afghanistan. Limited rights for women. Intolerance of other religions. Absence of free press. The absolute unity of “church” and state, etc.

      Perhaps a world as envisioned by Wahhabi-influenced terrorists is attractive to you. If that is the case, there is not much more I can offer you.

      – Equalizer

    • The fact is everyone says they are outraged by terrorism and want justice. Then when its pointed out that the u.s. is a major investor and instigator of terrorism the pro bushies and military enthusiasts convienently shup up. Why wasn’t bush interested in a public investigation of 9/11 the mother of all terrorist actions against the U.S.? Because he did it. Close the school of the Americas, join the world court, pay the u.n. bills, allow for charges of crimes against humanity to be brought against our soldiers, generals, and politicians. A good investigation of the london bombings will turn up someone YOU! don’t want to find, responsible. Zorro

    • That a boy, Equalizer... And I do mean, "boy"...

      Show us your weak, spooked, Whitey American self...

      Hahahahahehehe... Hahahaheheheh...

      You are what we need more of in America!!!

    • What you say Zoro is the God’s truth. Americans do not want to admit that it is their own government’s policies and actions around the world that breeds hatred and retribution. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Violence and war can not solve violence and war. Until we get rid of the fascists in our government here at home and the CIA is disband and the government drug smuggling rings exposed and prsoecuted and deprived of their illegal incomes there will be no peace in the world and that is just a fact.

    • If the US president wasn’t controlled by the arms manufacturers and oil companies Iraq and Afghanistan invasions would not have occurred. If Blair wasn’t such a spineless sycophant he wouldn’t have gone along with the beady eyed Forrest Bush.
      We Londoners, -thankyou Equalizer (very macho) for telling us Londoners to ’’Stand fast’’. How could we manage without you ?

      Now fuck off and do one.

    • God is just an opinion, man...
      And not mine!

    • Equalizer, indeed! Shut the hell up and go listen to your hate-mongering idol Michael Savage. How come Bush and Blair never mention Wahabbianism or wannabehabbism? Probably because Georgie boy can’t pronounce it. Al queda and nuklear are tough enough for that dolt.

      Crawl back into your little basement and dream up some other nonsense. You are Ass!

    • I don’t believe that.

      First, I believe he is independently wealthy enough to resist bribery from large corporations (weapons, oil, etc.). He knows he and his family will continue to live very comfortably without the need to take bribes.

      Second, I believe he has a strong connection to his faith and that he operates from a heart-felt duty to help his country and the world. I believe his connection to the American Judeo/Christian value system is stronger than his connection to any particular big business. He does what he believes his faith says is the right thing to do, not what a corporate board of directors dictates.

      And for those who like to call names, is that how you treat people who hold different opinions than yours? If you don’t think like me, fuck off? That attitude sounds eerily close to that of a certain group of religious fanatics.

      I have purposely kept a calm tone in my posts so we may have a respectful dialog. I ask you to do the same.

      – Equalizer

    • Seriously, name a democracy that was established without violence. There is none.

      Are you opposed to violence and war in every case, or only sometimes? Would you use violence in self-defense?

      If you oppose any kind of violence under any circumstance, I am familiar with your perspective.

      For many years I studied the meditative practices of Thich Nhat Hanh, learning to become more mindful of my breath, my thoughts, my body and my surroundings.

      But there was one element of his teaching that I always struggled with. That element was his utter commitment to peace through non-violence.

      Even if you are being attacked for no reason, Thich Nhat Hanh suggests sacrificing your own life as a statement of non-violence.

      I struggled with that concept for a long time and came to the conclusion I don’t agree with it.

      I feel it is my right and my obligation to defend myself and my family if someone is going to hurt us. I would use violence in such a case, would you?

      War is also necessary sometimes. Do you think it was wrong for the Allies to counter Nazi Germany with… violence? Or do you think Hitler would have spared Europe if someone simply offered to talk with him and hear out is concerns and feelings? Don’t laugh. Thich Nhat Hanh actually believes the best way to deal with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda is to sit down and talk:

      “We would respond gently but firmly in such a way to help them to discover their own misunderstandings so that they will stop violent acts from their own will.” – Thich Nhat Hanh

      http://www.beliefnet.com/story/88/s...
      http://www.beliefnet.com/story/88/story_8872_1.html

      Unfortunately, I believe Thich Nhat Hanh has seriously misjudged Bin Laden, Al-Zarqawi and their terrorist offspring. No amount of compassionate listening will satisfy London’s bombers or people like them! As I stated earlier, from the Wahhabi-inspired perspective, there are only two choices for everyone who doesn’t adopt their lifestyle: convert or die.

      – Equalizer

    • I will take my chance with the "terrorists" and all the other imaginary enemies that are used to justify spending a trillion dollars a year on the Pentagon. WWII was no different from any other war. If the fight against Hitler was so damned moral, why did the US turn away boatloads of Jewish refugees and refuse to take any action when they had documented evidence of the atrocities in death camps? When the German front moved toward North Africa and Rommel went for the oil in the Middle East, everything changed, and the war became a moral imperative. Give me a break, war is war and it’s about power and natural resources.

      It is ironic that the very specter you try to erroneously evoke about some Islamic conspiracy to change my life is already true of the rising Christian fundamentalism in US society. Telling everyone that they have to believe in some godhead, refusing to fill women’s prescriptions, threatening gay families, replacing science and art with superstitious fairy tales—these are the tools of your so-called Taliban, and they are not somewhere else, they are here—in the flesh, just look at Bush, Pat Robertson, and Ralph Reed. These are the ones who scare me.

    • I don’t disagree that resources play a part in war. If you don’t have resources, how will you defend yourself or stop aggression?

      I also don’t disagree that moral mistakes were made during WWII. However, the obvious net result was a liberated Europe and defeat of the Nazis, a tremendously huge moral victory.

      I actually feel the U.S. should have intervened earlier, but who is to say the outcome mightn’t have been different if it did?

      I am particularly sensitive to the Jewish refugees who were turned back – I wish it would have been different.

      But it should be plainly obvious to us that the great moral good that came out of WWII clearly outweighs the mistakes that were made.

      All wars, WWII, the current war in the Middle East – they are messy, mistakes happen, and innocents are killed. But you have to ask yourself what would life be like if no one stands up to people like Hitler, the Taliban, Saddam or the janjaweed who today rape and murder the people of Darfur? What do you do when negotiations, politicking and trade restrictions fail to halt severe human rights violations and genocide?

      You may not have felt the impact of Islamic fanaticism living in the U.S., but our European friends have. France feebly attempted to hide the growing number of immigrant Muslims who aren’t assimilating into the sacrosanct Secularism of French society – by banning headscarves. Germany is dealing with regular “honor killings” while its Turkish community silently accepts the practice. And we’ve seen how Spain changed its policy according to terrorist will (…although I do not diminish the huge mistake President Aznar made when he initially blamed Basque separatists).

      European acquiesce toward Muslim extremism, high birthrates among Muslim communities, absence of other, non-Muslim religious communities – these factors will help shape a future Europe that is very different from the one we know today.

      Finally, reading the examples you gave of “rising Christian fundamentalism” made me chuckle. Women’s prescriptions going unfilled! Threatening gay families! Please! At least the Christians aren’t trying to kill me for not being Christian!

      Extremist Muslim cultures collapse walls on openly gay people (odd form of execution, isn’t it?). They shoot women accused of adultery with automatic weapons. They do not permit people to practice other religions – church IS the state. The U.S. may have its share of social debates regarding gay marriage, abortion, separation of church and state, etc. but to compare that to the harsh repression of women, gays and non-Muslims that persists in some Muslim communities today, you expose your lack of moral discernment.

      – Equalizer

  • By reading the comments of this board I feel how many American Talibans must be out there.

    We don’t even know who was behind this attack by now. The authorities are still guessing! There is always a possibilty that IRA or Mossad is behind these attacks.
    Israel is trying also the break into the bank monopoly of London City. There is mounting evidence that Israeli who get employment with European banks in London and Switzerland steal data and installing spy software.

    Just listen to Bush’s speech - Americans, you must be real crazy having this guy who belongs into a mental institutions like his North Korean counterpart as president.

    • Humm..the term equalizer..you mean like equal..both sides equal? I dont get it based on what you say. We all choose sides like based on personal right and wrong so what’s the case here.. we all have an opinion and sometimes we dont meet eye to eye..you gotta respect that..it is say, a christian standard and probable muslim one too and well yes it makes sense duh. A simple question, DO YOU THINK LADEN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11 OR BUSH? Very simple because really that is it. Personally I think Bush is part of the gang with the agenda of eventual really bad evil things for us. In the here and now or well ever since his first ’elected’ presidency the shit has hit the fan and really he is making things worse..well that is what the polls say with the % of americans thinking so and I can bet it is probably much worse. Here where I stand and talk to fellow americans at street level Bush is seen with distaste like 9 outta 10 and that is a fact. Polls? huh?