[lbo-talk] Re: Motives of the London bombers

[Carl Remick]

>From: ravi <lbo at kreise.org>
>
>On 05/08/2005 6:19 PM, Luke Weiger wrote:
> > Ravi wrote:
> >
> >> but when was it claimed that the bombing is a result of the iraq war?
> >
> > Remick and Brown have repeatedly made that claim.  So has at least one
> > Guardian writer.
> >
>
>searching through the archives for "london bomb result iraq war"
>(perhaps the search engine does substring match by default, instead of
>all words?), all i could find was:
>
>adding 'remick' to the search:
>
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20050725/015962.html
>
>a post by carl but he's talking about the murder of the brazilian in
>london being a result of the iraq war.
>
>substituting "carl" for "remick" made not much difference (yielded two
>false positives).

I have never been a false positive!  I am a true negative ;-)

In any event, Ravi, may I assure you that I have been beating the gong for 
Iraq as the prime motive for the London bombing right along, including posts 
such as:


>From July 12 --

... The case that the London bombings are a
direct response to Blair's murderous assault on Iraq may be circumstantial
but seems highly likely.  As Henry David Thoreau said of suspected
milk-watering: "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you
find a trout in the milk." ...


>From July 13 --

... you can keep repeating
"nobody in Britain has been killed because of the Iraq war" mantra-like as
many times as you want, if it makes you feel better (talk about whistling
past the graveyard).  But I think the facts are there for anyone to see, who
*wants* to seem them, that over four dozen Britons lost their lives last
week because of Blair's criminal folly in Iraq.  Res ipsa loquitur. ...

Carl