From 9/11 to 7/7: Crusade intensifies

[maruf]

This article by br. Abid ullah Jan says all I said in my previous posts, but only much better.


Al hamdulillah! May Allah reward him!

was-salaam






From 9/11 to 7/7: Crusade intensifies


By abid ullah jan
Published: July 08, 2005


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The staged terrorist attacks are the occasions when even the most honest and since of us lose sight of the reality. One can guess it from the statements of George Galloway and others who called it “shock and awe” in London.



Galloway considers that Londoners had “paid the price” of the increased likelihood of terrorist attacks for the UK government’s role in the attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan. However sincere such comments may be, they directly support the accusations without evidence which Blair put forward within minutes of the attack.



This was not a “shock and awe" in London because it was not an attack by aggressors from outside after years of lying through their teeth to the whole world. It was just another inside job: another staged 9/11 to intensify the war on Islam. Follow the pattern to believe it.



Within hours the news on AFP site read: “Blair, analysts see Islamic link to London blasts.” Well, we deserve to take a look at those experts Blair relies on. Please note: Boaz Ganor, director general of Israel's International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism and Mordechai Kedar, a counter-terrorism analyst for Israel's public television.



Also note the language Blair used: “It is 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 in a desire to impose extremism on the world.” Didn’t Bush use the same words? Interestingly, even Paul Martin of Canada unnecessarily referred to "our way of life" and "freedom." Everyone was talking his heart and mind today without waiting for any clue as to who committed these horrible acts.



Blair brought Islam and Muslims into the fry right away: “We know that these people act in the name of Islam, but we also know that the vast and overwhelming majority of Muslims, here and abroad, are decent and law-abiding people who abhor this act of terrorism every bit as much as we do.” Does it ring the familiar bell of the clash of civilisations and blaming Muslims without a single shred of evidence available at hand?



Comparing what Blair uttered in the most irresponsible way to what Bush said on 9/11, one comes to the conclusion that Bush was far moderate in his allegation. Blair jumped from “our way of life” to “our values” and “their values” in a show of transparent, well rehearsed sophistry.



Bush directly referred to the beginning of a crusade after 9/11. See how Blair went far ahead without mentioning the word crusade: “We will show, by our spirit and dignity, and by our quiet but true strength that there is in the British people, that our values will long outlast theirs.”



Blair and Bush’s values are known to the world since they lied, invaded Afghanistan and then Iraq to continue brutal occupation and wreak terror into the lives of humiliated Iraqis. What we need to find here is the clues to this bombing from the public record available before the event unfolded on July 8, 2005 because it is confirmed that like 9/11 there would be no investigation. Even if there is any investigation, it would be simply confirm what Blair had to say today.



Those who remember, the Indian Express and others reported Associated Press story on June 24 that BBC announced it would time delay “sensitive” news. Immediately, keen observers concluded that England would soon be the next site of a staged “terror” attack.[1]



Every word that we heard from Blair and his company shows that the recent bombing was a false flag operation designed to keep the West pitted against Islam. Even if we assume that 9/11 and 7/7 are handy operations carried by Muslims, we have yet to hear from someone that these attacks have been carried out “on a way of life” or “values” of the West. All these are fig leaves, used by those who have killed millions to impose their “values” and “way of life” abroad.



It does not take one to be a Muslim to understand what is going on. It only needs a cool mind to understand that the attack only benefits empires desperate to maintain a foothold in the Middle East without further eroding public opinion. Some reports show that Israeli embassy in London was warned before the attack and Israel insists that it doesn’t mean it has also carried out the attack.[2] Associated Press, however, reported that Nathanyahu change his planes due to bomb warning.[3] National Post in Canada also confirmed that the Israelis received warnings before the attack.[4]



Trying to spin their way out of this mess, Israeli embassy strongly denied early warning and claimed that it received the call after the first explosion.[5] But the claim that the call came after the first explosion doesn't work either because for almost an hour after that first blast it was still being reported as a power surge related accident.



Just this week, it was reported that England had drafted plans to pull out their troops.[6] Is the bombing a victory for Al Qaeda in this context? Are we to believe then that the orchestrated response to these plans was to blow up a double decker bus in England? Now, can you guess what the most likely response to such an event would be: Pull the troops out faster or galvanize public support, thus keeping the troops in Iraq?



To take advantage of the staged bloody game, almost instantly a previously unheard of Islamic group [7](The Secret Organization of al-Qaeda in Europe?) took credit – even though the translation falls apart under scrutiny because the Qur’an is improperly cited.[8] This is just the beginning and the war lords are already giving references to “Islamofascists” in their Islamophobic magazines such as National Review.[9] Jerusalem Post came out with the headline: “Rules of Conflict for a World War” (July 07, 2005).


We must not forget that Madrid bombers were linked to Spanish Security Service,[10] and other reports from sources such as BBC cited suspects as police informants.[11] As the co-opted media analysts are trying to draw links between Madrid and London, let us not forget the part where the suspects were connected to the government.



What gives us the motive right there is the statement by Fox News' Brian Kilmeade, who said London terror attack near G8 summit "works to ... Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together" along with who really did it.[12]



There is not even a shred of evidence available so far that could implicate Muslims. However, what is undoubtedly clear is that those who staged these terror attacks once again exhibited the sort of calculation and ruthlessness that has come to be associated with the ideology at the heart of the crusade in the name of a “war on terror”: Islamofascism.




Abid Ullah Jan is the Author of The End of Democracy and A war on Islam.



Notes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] “BBC to time-delay live sensitive broadcasts,” Associated Press, the Indian Express, June 24, 2005. www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=73187

[2] Report: Israel Was Warned Ahead of First Blast 13:30 Jul 07, '05 / 30 Sivan www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=853465765 Also see: Britain failed to protect London even after Israel warned Britain of coming Al-Qaeda terror – inefficiency or conspiracy?
India Daily News Bureau Jul. 7, 2005. URL: www.indiadaily.com/editorial/3489.asp Also see: www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=85346 Also see: www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/070705israelwarned.htm

[3] AMY TEIBEL, “Netanyahu Changed Plans Due to Warning,” Associated Press, July 07, 2005. news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050707/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_britain_explosions_1

[4] www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=ca84a44d-41c2-4b9f-b9a5-9b6f0bdce990

[5] Yossi Melman, “Israeli Embassy strongly denies report it received early warning of attacks,” Haaretz, July 07, 2005. www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/597425.html



[6] Jimmy Burns and Peter Spiegel, “MoD plans Iraq troop withdrawal,” Financial Times, July 4, 2005 22:02. news.ft.com/cms/s/a1384df4-ecbc-11d9-9d20-00000e2511c8.html

[7] news.yahoo.com/s/nm/security_britain_claim_dc

[8] Phony reports link Al Qaeda to London attacks, Al-Jazeera. See: www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=8925 and www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8496293/

[9] Frank J. Gaffny Jr. “War Footing: The attack in London is a stark reminder of what we must do to prevail.,” National Review, July 07, 2005 www.nationalreview.com/gaffney/gaffney200507071128.asp

[10] prisonplanet.tv/articles/june2004/062104madridbombers.htm

[11] Spain suspects 'were informants' BBC, Thursday, 29 April, 2004, 14:39 GMT 15:39 UK



[12] mediamatters.org/items/200507070005

[Islamic Revival]

Very true. JazakAllah khair for posting this here.


The following statement really sums it up:



"It does not take one to be a Muslim to understand what is going on. It only needs a cool mind to understand that the attack only benefits empires desperate to maintain a foothold in the Middle East without further eroding public opinion."


Whenever there is a crime, people look for the motive first. We should ask ourselves, who will benefit the most from these attacks? Certainly not the Muslims.

[azfar]

salam:
Politics is the art of premption. It can be said that the recent bombing can provide the pretext to holding back troops in Iraq. But, when the elections have been won & people have given thier implicit support to the government, it is futile to stage such a fiasco in order to keep troops engaged.
Thought controls the action. Change the previous information change the action, likes & dislikes good and bad.
The bombing trigger varied feelings in the british masses. The thought presented in Blair speech was an attempt to protect Capitalist Ideology. And its existence and permanence was prophecized. But, it was effectively focussed towards islam and muslims without discrimination. What the government, here is doing is the trained the minds to generate similar response of hatred to islam. Project islam as a threat rather a treatment.
External Threat creates internal cohesion.
So, When khilafah comes and capitalism is actually as an ideology. Masses would already have been programed to respond towards islam and khilafah state as a threat. And with gaurds raised, they will unite against dying capitalism..
Allah SWT says in Tauba:48: "Certainly they sought (to sow) dissension before, and they meditated plots against you until the truth came, and Allah's commandment prevailed although they were averse (from it). "

[e-mail]

[Islamic Revival]

DIVIDE AND RULE: Moderate versus Extremist


On BBC Radio 4's Today programme on 9 July 2005 Tony Blair said that there has to be an ideological struggle in which terrorism is "pulled up by the roots"and that 'moderates' should 'confront extremists and defeat them.'

www0.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today3_blair_20050709.ram

Whatever the real truth about the bombings, which we may never find out, the Prime Minister has decided already to blame Muslims for the bombings, and decided that this will be an opportunity to set 'moderate' against 'extremist' in a battle for Islamic thought.

This means that there will be an accelerated attempt to reform Islamic thought, to root out ideas of Political Islam, Khilafah, Hudood, legitimate Jihad and more defining what constitutes extremist and moderate thinking. The aim would be that Muslims should accept religion in private, yet not in their public, community or political affairs.

In a BBC TV News report on 7 July 2005 it was mentioned that although Muslim groups condemn these bombings, some of these same groups share the same goal as Al Qaeeda of an Islamic sate, but use different means to achieve it [i.e. non violent and political]. It then went on to say that some of these groups were associated with Shaykh Qardawi who last year condoned 'suicide bombing' in Palestine.

By linking these London bombings, which Islam does not permit, to legitimate Islamic views about resisting an enemy occupation, or for the desire for the Islamic Khilafah government and media are essentially attempting to redefine Islam, and setting the limits for what is extremist or not.

The only is Islam any of us know is Islam that stems from the Quran and Sunnah, and that can be measured against these sources of divine revelation. Islam does not allow targeting of innocent civilians but, like most other political systems, obliges a resistance to occupation and defines its own unique political system.

Part of an ongoing campaign

None of this is new. In 2003, the then Home Secretary David Blunkett gave a speech in which he said: 'It is a worrying trend that young, second-generation British Muslims are more likely than their parents to feel they have to choose between feeling part of the UK and feeling part of their faith.' Also 'It is religious extremism which forces them to choose, separating them from their citizenship and demanding the impossible. Again, the issue here is identity: whether people are able to identify with the actual world in which they live, or with another world they are taught about, which offers the absolute certainties which day-to-day interaction can never offer. We need to work together to resist this by 'we' I mean government and faith leaders working together.'

Also the UK based think tank CIVITAS in its paper 'The West, Islam and Islamism', wrote 'It is not enough for the vast majority of decent, peaceful, law-abiding Muslims to renounce terror in principle, including September 11 and similar events. They also need to renounce the views frequently expressed by Islamists' of an inevitable war between Islam and the rest of the world. If they choose to live in Western liberal democratic societies, they must accept the values of liberal democracy—as Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and others have done for many years.'

So the message is that 'extremist' means a person who may think that Islam forbids the London bombings, but who also believes that Islam obliges resistance to attack and occupation in its homeland, and who believes that an Islamic Khilafah is desirable. 'Extremist' means the one that thinks religion offers some absolute certainties, and 'moderate' is the one who thinks we simply accept the standards and norms around us, no matter how bad, and not question them or think to change them for the better based on our Islamic beliefs.

In addition the 'moderates' must do more to condemn the 'extremists' not simply condemn actions that Islam condemns. It is expected that the Muslims should become moderate and secular.

We Muslims know that these are attempts are part of the global war on terror, which has included reforming the education curricula in Muslim countries so that subjects of politics and Jihad are excluded, because the Muslim lands can never truly be subdued and wholly exploited while Muslims hold to Islamic ideas. We also know their fears that the days of colonisation of these lands are over if there is a re-establishment of the Khilafah, that will harness the resources for the citizens of the state, Muslim and non Muslim, and not for greedy governments and corporations.

It is our duty to hold on to Islam as it is, not to help to change it for western tastes and so help them in there colonisation. It is essential that our faith is not another casualty from the bombings last Thursday

[Islamic Revival]

The sick mindset of the double terrorists

By Abid Ullah Jan

Al-Jazeerah, July 10, 2005


If anything positive may emerge from the July 7 tragedy in London it is the growing realization that the terrorists and those who claim to be fighting a ‘war on terrorism’ are just one and the same people. For this reason we must resolve to expose the enemies of freedom and never give up to the hollow rhetoric of freedom and democracy on the part of double-terrorists.

Believing in their statements of mass deception or even staying silent in the face of their ever increasing lies sends the message to the double-terrorists and their allies that their terrorism upon terrorism works in favor of their totalitarian designs and so makes further atrocities at home and abroad more likely.

Blair's declaration that acts of terrorism will never influence British government policy is a clear sign that the attacks were staged for influencing public opinion in favor of not only continuing the bloodbath of innocents abroad but also to consolidate tyranny at home without much resistance.

One must note that after exposure of the Downing Street Memos and all associated lies that were invented to legitimize bloodbath in Iraq, there was a growing pressure on the UK government to withdraw troops from Iraq. Furthermore, a growing number of Britons were realizing the preferential treatment of the worse-than-apartheid state-of-Israel’s never ending occupation, terrorism, open racism, crimes against humanity, and the double standards on the part of US and UK towards Muslim states.

To ease the pressure, the news was leaked to the press on June 24 that the US is planning to withdraw some troops from Iraq. But that was not good enough to swing public opinion. That’s why behind the scene, planning was underway to make sure terrorism continues with unabashed skullduggery. British public’s acquiescence to the regime’s policy of continuing the war in Iraq would reinforce the message that double-terrorism works. Such a message in support of terrorism upon terrorism would dishonor the memories of those who died on October 07 at the hands of the same terrorists who have taken lives of more than 120,000 Iraqis in the war and 1.8 million Iraqis through genocidal sanctions so far.

Not only government leaders, but many other citizens of the world, as civic leaders, religious leaders, teachers, netizens, and letter writers may help send the shame-less terrorists the right message by categorically condemning terrorism at home and abroad. Their immediate response of blaming Muslims for what happens is a clear sign that the bloodbath was staged. The repeated stress on “our way of life” and “values” show the totalitarian designs to impose the same on others with the barrel of a gun.

Unfortunately, in newscasts throughout the day, we have heard several Britons describing how they had felt distanced from terrorism occurring elsewhere in the world until today's events. This is why such barbaric events are staged when it is time to elect a war leader in Spain, or to make public opinion in favor of war in Australia, or to ensure continued support from Turkey. What was shown on the “mainstream” TV channels was a typical human response that takes everything on the face value. The co-opted commentators kept repeating that many Britons have viewed terrorism as America's problem in a way to mean: “Did you see it for yourself now. Don’t say no to any war that we may be launching in the near future.”

Whatever else might be said about such expressions, they simply support the message from the leading crusaders (Bush and Blair) that terrorism works, that it can enable its perpetrators to shape world opinion as well as world order in their image. Such a message encourages others to join the ranks of terrorist armies at home and opportunistic collaborators abroad for more violence in distant parts of the world, a tiny fraction of which the British witnessed today.

Therefore we must take this opportunity to realize that the perpetrators on the bombing in London and Iraq and Afghanistan are using well trained armies to commit terrorism abroad and well trained secret agents to commit terrorism at home for additional support for terrorism abroad.

While the terrorists are fighting in the name of freedom and democracy and that definitely has merit, the intentional invasions and occupations on the basis of lies, the intentional killing of innocent people and the intentional establishment of countless concentration camps is never justifiable as means to promote the stated cause. The democratic terrorists should have learned from the failure of Communism that the end does not justify the means.

We will never be able to see an end to terrorism because the double-terrorists are the perpetrators: the real culprits. They then become the judge, the prosecutor and also declare a “war on terrorism.’ Very very strange indeed: we are facing mass deception of an unprecedented scale in human history.

A mere realization of this reality is enough to neutralize terrorist practices by preventing them from attaining their totalitarian designs in the short run. In the long run, they are going to take themselves out of steam with their own hands. No one is militarily so strong to defeat them. However, they digging a deep hole for themselves with the belief that they can continue to lie, cheat and fool the world indefinitely.

Public opinion is a powerful force. Spain withdrew its forces from Iraq. Italy is withdrawing partial forces in the face of mounting expressions of domestic and world opinion. Even UK leaked it to the press that it is considering withdrawal. Immediately after the bombing the double-terrorists’ initial promise was to keep fighting the war they have launched on the basis of nothing else but pure lies.

Thus, the categorical condemnation of this double-terrorism would go a long way towards its elimination. We need to expose and defeat the mindset that promotes and sustains this bloody game of double terrorism. Such a mindset is not hard to notice. For example, this mindset would argue to forget about Israeli, American, Russian and Indian occupations; focus on ending resistance to these occupations.

The cruel, inhuman mindset of these double-terrorists argues that the world must never give even the appearance of approving of, or yielding, to the resistance posed by the occupied, oppressed and humiliated people in Palestine, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq and Kashmir in word or deed. For example, such a sick mindset criticizes the New York Times for arguing that the New York Times arguing that the Chechans deserve independence. They force people to take things on the face value and exact collective punishment on nations. Just the way they practice double-terrorism, they also use double language. They would say: “Chechans and Palestinians may well deserve independence, but the atrocities that occur should have the effect of making the world deaf to their legitimate grievances for a substantial period of time.”

This mindset is on display in Israel and the US is following the same line in Iraq. All human beings are not alike, nor do they suffer equally under foreign occupations. Some of them would lose everything, their families and all loved ones and in desperation would react against the oppressors. Others would find it perfectly legitimate to fight for their freedom. It doesn’t mean that the terrorist-occupiers should prolong their unjust occupations on the basis that acts of resistance, which they call terrorism, should have the sole effect of impeding the legitimate causes they are intended to promote.

Such thinking is the product of the sick-terrorist-mindset of the double terrorists. They know that as long as their tyrannical occupation would remain in place, resistance is bound to come. And as long as there is resistance, there would remain justification for prolonging tyranny under the banner of a war on terrorism.

One such sick terrorist mind is on display on Media Monitors dot net. Len Breslow, in an article, “we are all in the same boat,” argues: “Were the world to turn its back on the Chechan cause in response to the actions of a handful of terrorists, many innocent Chechans would be penalized for the actions of the few. But I believe the cost is necessary since the destruction of innocent human life is worse than most forms of oppression.” [1]

It means the destruction on life on the part of Chechens is no destruction at all. It is destruction when it is exacted on the oppressors: the terrorists and the enemies of their freedom. If Chechens die, let them die and put their legitimate cause on hold. But let no one from the aggressor’s side face death and destruction. Would this kind of an approach ever work in bringing peace when we know about the law of nature that every action has an equal and opposite reaction?

The above quoted argument shows the exact ideas which Friedman, Pipes, Spencer and the rest of the war lords are promoting in different words, at different time but with more sophistication in a professional manner.

It is naïve to assume that such an inhuman approach to the already occupied and oppressed people would encourage the majority of those, whom the freedom fighters claim to represent to move against the freedom fighters, thus further isolating them. This is dream of the sick minds. If every Palestinian, Iraqi, Afghan and Chechen is not standing up to give his life for ending the oppression and occupation of the lying aggressors, it does not mean that they do not respect those who commit themselves to die for the sack of real freedom: not the freedom that the US has brought to Iraq and Afghanistan. It simply means that they expect their revenge tomorrow.

If Palestinians, Kashmiris and Chechens are given the right to self-determination, and if forces of tyranny are withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan, it would never amount to rewarding terrorism. The UK didn’t reward terrorists when it ended its occupation of the US. Nor all those Americans, who fought against King George and other tyrants from UK, were terrorists.

If we go by the standards promoted by the sick terrorist minds in the US and UK, then we will have to put the struggle for democracy and freedom in Iraq on hold because allowing US and UK to operate in Iraq and install governments of their choice there means the world is rewarding the terrorist who launched this war on false pretexts. First they have to renounce terrorism and then we will see what “legitimate” causes they want to promote with the unprecedented kind of naked aggression.

Hope the repeat tragedy on the pattern of 9/11 that occurred in London will drive home the lesson in Britain and the rest of the world that we are facing terrorism upon terrorism from the double-terrorists. No amount of silence or surrendering our rights to real freedom and self-determination will prevent them from striking at home and abroad with the twin objectives of consolidating police state at home and puppet regimes abroad.

Note:

[1] See world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/16559

[Islamic Revival]

London Displays Its Stiff Upper Lip

By Linda Heard, [e-mail]

Arab News

“Maybe it’s because I’m a Londoner that I love London town” goes a popular WWII song composed by Hubert Gregg after seeing the devastation wrought by doodlebugs on his city. Gregg died last year, but, had he lived, he would have been equally proud of the way his city bounced back after last week’s attacks. On Thursday, Londoners of every ethnicity showed their mettle, proved their reputation for stoicism, refused to be cowed and wasted no time in giving out business as usual signals. If anyone had their doubts, Sunday’s WWII celebrations when the Queen thought nothing of riding through the streets in an open-topped vehicle were proof positive.

Last week, all eyes were on London not only the site of the main Live 8 concert aimed at making poverty history but also the city which grabbed the 2012 summer Olympics from under the noses of the French. Hardly had the celebrations got seriously under way, when the four blasts went off leaving bodies scattered on pavements and trapped in underground rat-infested hell holes.

Was this the attack, which the former London police chief Sir John Stevens had warned was “inevitable” a year before? Was this the “blood price” which Tony Blair told the BBC he was prepared to offer up on behalf of the British people to cement the trans-Atlantic relationship during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in September 2002?

Not according to the prime minister. Even without a scrap of evidence, these attacks, he said, were carried out by the enemies of freedom who threaten our way of life and “all that we hold dear”. And immediately fingers began pointing at Al-Qaeda, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi as well as an assortment of Syrians and Moroccans.

According to Blair, the atrocities had nothing whatsoever to do with Britain’s presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Is the prime minister making sense? Groups, such as the Al-Qaeda-Jihad in Europe and the European wing of the Abu Hafs Al-Masri brigades have posted messages on websites taking responsibility for the bombings and lauding them as retaliation for Afghanistan, Iraq and desecrations of the Qur’an.

Given that, in one case, a Qur’anic verse was misquoted and the website server traced to Texas, we should certainly take these claims with a fistful of salt. But Blair’s announcement that the blasts were unconnected with his own government’s foreign adventurism is even harder to swallow, provided, that is, that they were, indeed, perpetrated by members of the Al-Qaeda franchise.

Anti-terrorism pundits and Britain’s Foreign Secretary Jack Straw have described the onslaught on London as having the Al-Qaeda fingerprint. Is this the case? Apart from the synchronicity of the attacks, there is little similarity with other Al-Qaeda atrocities.

Firstly, sophisticated explosives with timers were used rather than suicide bombers. Scotland Yard has dubbed the bomb-maker “a professional”, while John Stevens believes the perpetrators were British. Then, on Sunday, The Independent ran a story titled “Police hunt mercenary terror gang recruited by Al-Qaeda”, which went on to suggest that Al-Qaeda may have hired white mercenaries to do their dirty work, indicating a shortage of jihadists, and running contrary to reports indicating Al-Qaeda has more than it knows what to do with.

Since London’s double-deckers are fitted with CC-TV cameras, the claim that white mercenaries might be involved may be verifiable. But wait ... the camera on the afflicted bus had been out of order for some time.

There are also questions concerning the targeting of Al-Qaeda in this instance. For example, Edgware Road (“Little Arabia”), Aldgate and King’s Cross are all areas boasting large Muslim populations. The same goes for the borough of Hackney where the bus originated. Certainly, Al-Qaeda has set its sights on Muslims before, but would it purposefully choose to target Muslims from relatively poor areas when there were other alternatives more compatible with their stated ideological aims?

Furthermore, there are questions surrounding the timing of these bloody assaults. It has been more than two years since Britain and the US invaded Iraq, yet Islamists have apparently waited to punish London at a time when news has been leaked that British troops are set to withdraw within six months. It seems that the terrorists are not only “barbaric” but bereft of brain cells.

Coincidentally, too, the blasts occurred at a time when support for the “war on terror” on both sides of the Atlantic is flagging and when the tide of public opinion over the justifiability of invading and staying in Iraq is turning. They also took place when politicians, judges, lawyers, human rights organizations and ordinary folk have been complaining about governmental erosion of civil liberties and condemning extrajudicial detentions and torture.

The British government may cite the G-8 summit under way at Gleneagles, Scotland, at the time of the blasts as encouraging terrorists to pick July 7, but this date also provided the world’s most powerful leaders with a perfect “shoulder-to-shoulder” photo-op. George Bush is already using the attacks to shore up support for his “war on terror” virtually saying “I told you so”. Lastly, the fact that The Associated Press, Sky News and the Israeli paper Arutz Sheva reported the Israeli Embassy was warned of the attacks in advance, causing former Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu to cancel his visit to a London hotel near one of the blast sites, has yet to be explained. Scotland Yard has said it received no such warnings, and the Israeli Embassy has denied the reports, which originated from an Israeli military radio station.

In the meantime, Britain’s Home Secretary Charles Clarke has been strengthened in his resolve to introduce compulsory biometric identity cards and carry through new terrorist legislation. He is also pushing telephone and Internet companies to retain traffic records for up to a year, a request, which was earlier rejected by the European Parliament. Moreover, the attacks have cast public suspicion on to foreigners in their midst, a mood set to furnish Clarke with clout when it comes to deporting failed asylum seekers and incarcerating illegal immigrants.

The Muslim Council of Britain, representing the country’s 1.6 million Muslims, has already received over 30,000 hate mails, despite its vehement condemnation of the blasts, while mosques around the country have fallen victim to arson attacks.

But while I have little confidence in No. 10 and its chronic resistance to truth and objectivity, I have faith in the intrinsic skepticism of Londoners to disavow knee-jerk reactions and belief in their sense of fair play.

This is a multiethnic, multicultural, multireligious city peopled with tolerant and street savvy individuals. These are not people who easily fall for the spin and the spiel. If anyone can get past the myriad of distortions and faux allegations, they can, and speaking as a Londoner myself, I am convinced that they will.