Charmaine Yoest in London via PowerLine says the many of the Londoners she has interviewed just hours after the terrorist attack on their subway system think the bombings are Tony Blair’s fault:
“I interviewed three very ordinary, normal teenaged English Muslims… All three seem to be parroting Muslim talking points: ‘The bombings were a conspiracy by Blair to generate support for the war,’ they recited in a charming British accent… A young British black woman told me, ‘The bombings are Tony Blair’s fault – they killed a 100 thousand Iraqis – and it’s like a boomerang [coming back at the British].’ Most everyone [in London] I talked to believed that the British caused the bombing or had it coming. Of the dozen or so people I interviewed only white males in business attire expressed surprise that anyone would think the British were at fault. But these gentlemen were the minority. Most felt that the Brits were complicit.”
Yes, the dumbass Left still parrots the utterly ridiculous “100 thousand Iraqis” killed statistic posted by a British medical journal almost two years ago.
GlobalSecurity, a defense analysis firm based in Alexandria, VA, completely discredited the phony 100,000 Iraqi civilian casualty number as early as Fall 2003:
“The study was published in the October 29, 2004, online edition of The Lancet. ‘We estimate that there were 98000 extra deaths (95% CI 8000 – 194000) during the post-war period–’ from March 2003 through September 2004. CI refers to confidence interval.
But they did not find 98,000 additional deaths, but a range from 8,000 to 194,000 — a range is so broad as to be nearly meaningless. And of the 61 actual violent deaths attributed to Coalition forces, three were blamed on ground forces, while 58 deaths were attributed to ‘helicopter gunships, rockets, or other forms of aerial weaponry’ (p. 7). This might suggest that the air war had been infinitely more intense than previously believed, which is difficult to believe. For the ‘about 100,000 killed’ to be correct, almost all of these deaths would have been women and children killed by American air power, at a rate of nearly 200 a day. At least some of these deaths may have been due to the insurgency, since at least some Iraqis interpret insurgent car bombs as American cruise missile attacks.
These numbers would suggest that the US is fighting two wars: a well-publicized ground campaign in which US ground forces have killed over 5,000 enemy combatants this year [at an average rate of maybe 20 per day], and an invisible air campaign in which American helicopters are killing nearly 200 women and children every day. This is difficult to believe.”
If the “reality-based” community ever took some frickin’ remedial math courses rather than waiting to hear the numbers some intern at NPR came up with for Morning Edition, they would’ve realized that killing 100,000 people is the equivalent of killing every man, woman, and child in the city of Green Bay, WI. Ask a muckadoo the question: “How could Coalition Forces hide that fact from dozens of embedded reporters from diverse news agencies in 20+ nations?”
ANSWER: A conspiracy by Tony Blair in the spirit of the cunning plans often made by his fellow nefarious Englishman, Edmund Blackadder.
If I was Karl Rove, I’d be really angry that Tony Blair has stolen all of my conspiracy thunder over in Europe…
Karl Rove and Tony Blair…the odd couple of conspiracy.
Im sorry, but there seem to be a large number of idiots in the UK (not to say that there arent a large amount of idiots in the US), and they dont seem to understand patriotism. Someone attacks your country, and you blame it on the government.
It sure is nice for Al Quaeda to cover up for this conspiracy by admitting to it. Its always nice when they do that. They covered up for the US government on 9/11 too right?
Sounds like most of the British really dont care what goes on in the rest of the world. I would like to see some responses from Brits who do care, because I know they are around.
I think today’s best post was FrankJ’s conversation with Joe Foo.
Joe was relating how he was being shelled and it momentarily annoyed him before he rolled over and went back to sleep.
I sure hope we don’t continue spending entire days reacting to this stupid stuff. I think Joe Foo has it exactly right.
Let’s hit the snooze button!
Some left wing idiots seemed to have hacked the global security page you cited in your debunking of that 100,000 story. Good to know they need to resort to cheap tricks since all sane avenues of discourse has been closed off to them. lol
It would seem that all the free world leaders are using terrorist attacks to rally support of one kind or another for themselves. Let us not forget that Bush and his Zionist masters planned 9/11 as an excuse to go to war. The only question is… why did all the Jews know to stay out of London today?
I always felt that the “10,000 dead” casualty figure was bullcrap. It’s fun to be Right.
Hippie fags.
I’ve been listening to BBC and it’s sickening. Heard the 100,000 number mentioned twice in fifteen minutes. Constant laments that this “nevah would ‘ave ‘appened if it weren’t for George Bush.” Just repetitive insistence that this day’s events demonstrate conclusively that the WOT is a failed and misguided endeavor, which should be reconsidered and abandoned by right-thinking Brits. A droning-on about how Islam is a religion of peace. Baseless assertions, stated as fact, that the WOT has increased Islamo-fascist recruitment and endangered lives far and above the risk posed by an unprovoked al Quaida, and that “hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians” are being slaughtered by American troops.
“If one’s to be objective,” the allegedly disinterested jackass reporter asserts, “one’s got to note the increase in terrorist activities as a consequence of the Americans’ presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.”
What? So, this increase in terrorist activities trope I’ve been hearing–what’s that based in? 9/11–Al Quaida’s crowning jewel–could certainly not have resulted from America’s response to 9/11. Since 9/11/01 there’s been 2 train bombings in Madrid and London. Casualties were progressively less in each incident. This is evidence of Al Quaida’s insurmountable strength and the failure of the WOT?
I swear, Brits are beginning to demonstrate the same short memory, lack of perspective, and pansy-Euro enabler response that Michael Moore and Spain give to terrorists. They’re toast, and my sympathies are waning.
THEY ARE SQUANDERING MY GOODWILL!!!!!
only left wing liberals, muslim extremist, anarchist, anti-Americans, anti-Bush, anti-Blair would think like that
Excellent post, Scott. I was wondering how the bombing would play out with the Brits — hoping that they wouldn’t go all squishy the way the Spanish did. Yet with the Blame Bush! quotes piling up from the man on the street, it looks likely.
I was Instant Messaging with a friend of mind who lives outside of London, and his biggest concern was not the WOT, but that now Blair would have “his ammo” for a dreaded National ID card . . .
Sad. Very sad.
wow… i just can’t understand why people around the world hate americans so much. oh wait, it’s people like you.
first, the article that comprises this posting is completely racist. “recited in a charming british accent”. your brilliant reporter is amazed that the lesser races can speak. how quaint.
second, whatever number some “defense analysis firm” gives for iraqi deaths is somehow more legitimate than the numbers provided by hospitals and morgues in iraq? try not to be completely brainless. while i find it hard to believe that 100,000 have been killed, there are counts available that cite the number of CIVILIAN deaths at some 22,000. how many would be the appropriate number of deaths before people grown irate? it only took 3,000 here in the u.s.
to brad: al quaeda never actually took responsibility for 9/11, which is rather curious. why go through all that effort and preparation and then miss the chance to deliver your “message” to the world? yes they are an awful terrorist organization, but just because fox news says that they did something does not mean that it is so.
also, british people acknowledging that people in other areas of the world are angry, and rightfully so, is not an indication that they “really don’t care what goes on in the rest of the world.” get a brain.
to jmk: if the world had not spent weeks doting on 9/11, hyper-nationalists like you and your co-readers here would have been bitching for years. get over it when your relatives get sent to iraq and killed, f***er.
to mike fitch: you might be funny in germany in 1935. here and now you are an asshole.
to damian g: you must be so proud of your amazing prognosticatory abilities. i hope you die in a fire.
to ss: see my comments to brad regarding 9/11 and numbers of casualties. furthermore, no one defending the war on “terror” should comdemn “baseless assertions” as they are what you favorite social program is driven by. you can’t seriously be thick-headed and ignorant of history enough to not be able to relate oppression with violent outbursts from the oppressed. how the f*** do you think this country came into being, moron? our “patriots” were englandss “terrorists” and this is the same condition that exists for “terrorists” and “patriots” today. you are a waste of skin.
to jay: try complete sentences, they are simple and you should supposedly have their syntax innately prgrammed into your head.
to homocon: nice name. either you are a closet homosexual with anti-social leanings or an outed homosexual with no self worth. is your idea of spaniards going “squishy” the results of their election. if you followed spanish politics, which you obviously don’t (and you probably are completely unaware of what goes on in your own government) you would know that the winner of that election was possessed of politics that corresponded with 70% of the spanish populace. our f***face in cheif can certainly not make such a claim. may all of your friends and relatives spontaneously combust.
and finally, to the people (ir)responsible for this worthless website. you are very angry fellows. you are racist homophobes whose ideas mesh well with other fascists, nazis, and complete idiots. i have noted that you can rarely back up anything you say. hearsay, and your own opinions, do not constitute proof of anything. get over youselves. you are slime. i don’t know what community college political science classes you took that convinced you that you are intelligent and righteous, but you should demand your money back. try reading. history, current events, if you are feeling brave enough to engage some polysyllabic words you might try some philosophy or logic. what you will find is that you are not the only people in the world. everyone is angry at something. your anger is not more important and does not override anyone else’s. you are sollipsistic egomaniacs. please get a clue. you make me ashamed to be an american and to be a human being.
enjoy
I’m English. I love Americans (well, the ones in the red states anyway) – so much so that I’m figuring out how to get my hands on a green card. I love George W Bush. I detest lefties. I love reading this web site.
But…
There seems to be some confusion on this site with regard to Blair. Blair is not a friend of right-thinking individuals. Blair is not a friend of America. Blair is not a friend of democracy.
I would rather have John Kerry running this country than Blair. That should say it all.
The only reason he helped you guys out in Afghanistan and Iraq (which is the only thing he’s done right, IMHO) is that he wants to make his own personal mark on history. No other reason.
Blair is far more left wing than your most leftist of Democrats. He’s a marxist (Google it, I’m sure you’ll find something).
He took our guns away. He’s taking us further into the socialist European Union. He’s going to impose mandatory ID cards on everyone. He’s going to impose “Big Brother” style tracking in our cars so he knows where we are all the time. He’s introducing laws to curb our freedom of speech – Ann Coulter would be in jail by now if she lived here. He’s slowly removing our property rights (much like your leftists in the Supreme Court in the New London case). He removed the trespass law so we can’t stop unauthorised strangers from standing on our property. There’s plenty more.
He’s also consistently lied about everything (and no, I’m not talking WMD’s – I’m talking about manifesto policies).
Support for ID cards has been waning. Blair says that 80% of the people support his new pet project. Surveys say that 80% of people are against.
It’s been pointed out that the bombs in London yesterday were small devices which didn’t cause much damage to infrastructure. This can be observed in the way that the bottom of the bus wasn’t affected – most terrorist bombs would have obliterated the entire bus, not just the top deck.
The point?
You’re going to have to work that one out for yourselves. But ask yourselves: why did Netanyahu stay in his hotel room on a tip from Scotland Yard?
first, the article that comprises this posting is completely racist. “recited in a charming british accent”. your brilliant reporter is amazed that the lesser races can speak. how quaint.
Patty, if abuse of a strawman were a crime, you’d be spending the rest of your life behind bars.
And the Lancet’s “100,000” has been widely debunked.
Bob,
the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It’s called realpolitik. Now Blair might be a step away from a pinko commie, but I assure you, he’s still far from the real communists… I know. I still have them in my own country.
They despise Blair, and they consider him a right-winger and a traitor to the Cause.
…and being a dirty communist didn’t stop the US and the UK from allying themselves with Stalin in WW2, didn’t it? Again, realpolitik.
Besides, and I must be blunt on this, if so many Brits don’t like Blair they can stop voting him.
To Patrick:
I must defer you to the Osama tapes that surfaced after 9/11. Unless the translators are lying, comments such as “we never thought the attack would go that well” lead me to believe that they are behind the attack. Most terrorists do admit to their attacks, and the fact that no other large terrorist organizations admitted to the attack gives credibility to Al Quaeda’s claim.
As for the British, I know not everyone feels the same, but reports that “everyone the reporter talked to said it was the governments fault for supporting the WOT” really make me wonder what their priorities are. Its fine with me if they dont want to participate in the WOT, and the terrorists keep attacking their country. Terror is not going to stop if we back off, and the terrorists do not attack because we attacked them, they attack because they hate us. Join the world and help in the fight. They dont care if they kill civilians, and you shouldnt let it come to that. I dont blame the British or anyone for this attack, but we must continue to fight them if we want to continue to live.
Damn that Tony Blair for stealing the credit for the bombing from we Jews.
Knowing my luck, I bet that Jacques Chirac will steal credit form me when I bomb Paris.
Bastards!
I actually read the Lancet study. What they don’t emphasize is that they found 400.000 dead, not 100.000.
The reason is that according to their “methods” 300.000 people died in Falujah alone (an area they define as having 500.000 inhabitants). The method is of course asking people if they know anyone who has died, and than multiplying the number by a multiple of thousands.
Even the idiots understood that the Falujah figure was physically impossible, so they excluded it from the end-result. But they still used the exact same obviously flawed method for the rest of Iraq! That the media and the left keeps repeating the number shows they have waived goodbye to logic a long long time ago.
Way to go “Bob” for setting US readers straight about Tony Blair. You mentioned rescinding the law of trespass, which means if you kill or injure a burglar in your home at night, you can wind up doing more time than the felon. I left UK at the end of 2003 because I was disgusted with the wrong directions the UK was taking, and it’s got a lot worse since. Don’t trust Blair, he’s pure Leninism: The expediency of temporary alliances.
Time for fisking fun…
“and finally, to the people (ir)responsible for this worthless website. you are very angry fellows.”
Translation: This website doesn’t tell me what I want to hear, so it is worthless. I can’t stand someone not agreeing with my narrow worldview.
“you are racist homophobes whose ideas mesh well with other fascists, nazis, and complete idiots.”
I’m Hispanic and support gay rights. I’ll take “Sweeping Generalizations and Ill-formed Logic for $200, Alex.”
“i have noted that you can rarely back up anything you say. hearsay, and your own opinions, do not constitute proof of anything.”
Talk about projection.
“get over youselves. you are slime.”
I realize you are bitter about being dropped in a trash can after you were born, but please try and keep the hyperbole to a minimum.
“i don’t know what community college political science classes you took that convinced you that you are intelligent and righteous, but you should demand your money back.”
I have a Master’s degree in history from Arizona State. What is YOUR education?
“try reading. history, current events, if you are feeling brave enough to engage some polysyllabic words you might try some philosophy or logic.”
This coming from a person whose little diatribe is rife with enough logical fallacies to choke a wooly mammoth.
“what you will find is that you are not the only people in the world. everyone is angry at something. your anger is not more important and does not override anyone else’s.”
Neither does yours.
“you are sollipsistic egomaniacs.”
You are a pseudo-intellectual snob.
“please get a clue. you make me ashamed to be an american and to be a human being.”
You make baby Jesus cry.
“also, british people acknowledging that people in other areas of the world are angry, and rightfully so, is not an indication that they “really don’t care what goes on in the rest of the world.” get a brain”
Quite interesting really. When the IRA were bombing Britain regularly for decades, there was none of this handwringing going on. They buried their dead, dug their heels in, and gave the IRA the finger. There was no concern that the IRA and their followers might have genuine reasons to be angry. Indeed, the IRA are almost polite compared to these terrorists. The IRA bombed to make a political point, they had a political goal. Often they gave plenty of forewarnings to boot in order to evacuate. They had a political goal and it wasn’t just about seeing how many brits they could kill.
These turds do not warn, they bomb to kill, and they bomb for the same reasons they have always bombed, before Iraq and before Afghanistan.
My point is, it seems my fellow countrymen have been decided to believe any old sob story given to them by the very people trying to kill them.
Oh, and BTW, London is somewhat liberal, hell Red Ken got elected mayor twice, not to mention it is a very diverse population. Imagine the comments you would get nowadays if they bombed San Fran, or LA, or New York. No doubt the media would be plastered with comments saying it was Bush’s fault.
“My point is, it seems my fellow countrymen have been decided to believe any old sob story given to them by the very people trying to kill them.”
It’s called:
Taqiyya (pronounced tark-e-ya) : precautionary dissimulation or deception and keeping one’s convictions secret.
Kitman: mental reservation and dissimulation or concealment of malevolent intentions.
Taqiyya has been used by Muslims since the 7th century to confuse and split ‘the enemy’. A favored tactic was ‘deceptive triangulation’; to persuade the enemy that jihad was not aimed at them but at another enemy. Another tactic was to deny that there was jihad at all. The fate for such faulty assessments by the target was death. đŸ˜‰
Shoot first and ask questions after, somebody get a rope, the only good Muslim’s a dead Muslim. Make that Brazilian electrician. And ole Rush Limbaugh, he sure helps me make sense of everything, except he’s a tad too liberal on some issues. Like everybody knows we have to reduce world population by 90%. Sure hope I make the A list.
You want to listen to yourselves sometimes. A simplistic foreign policy has got the US mired in Iraq. And what justification will it take get the public on board for an attack on Iran? A nuke strike would do it. Now what part of America is most expendible, but still not totally insignificant?