[lbo-talk] Re: London - Amnesia Express

Simon Huxtable jetfromgladiators at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 13 03:17:29 PDT 2005



> Unless you know something everybody else does not,
> the question of who
> carried out the bombings in london remains a
> mystery. The idea that they
> might have been carried out by right-wing extremists
> is, at this point as
> plausible a scenario as anything else.

No, it is not. Here is the evidence against it: (from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4676861.stm)

# All four suspects were British nationals of Pakistani descent. Three of the four were from West Yorkshire

# All four were captured on CCTV at King's Cross station, wearing rucksacks, shortly before 0830 BST on the morning of the attacks. The footage was found on Monday night

# One suspect was reported missing by his family. Some of his belongings were found on the bombed Number 30 bus in Tavistock Square

# Property linked to a second man was found at the scene of the Aldgate/Liverpool Street Tube bomb

# Items belonging to a third suspect were found at the site of the Aldgate/Liverpool Street and Edgware Road Tube bombs

# It is very likely the three men whose belongings were found at the bomb scenes are dead, police sources say.


> I think it is *your* smarts that are in question
> here Doug, and not only
> your smarts, but your sense of fairness and
> impartiality. The fact is: we
> don't know who did it. Why are you acting as though
> we do?

What does 'fairness' mean in this context? Fairness towards what or whom? Fairness towards the evidence? On the basis of the evidence I cited above, I think it is fairer to conclude that the bombing was perpetrated by British Muslims and not Neo-Nazis.

The latter claim seems to be predicated on the fact that the far right has perpetrated atrocities in the past and therefore might had done so again. It might be argued that Islamic terrorism has been blamed on 'past form' too. But the evidence overwhelmingly points to it as the cause.

You may have cited the Madsen piece for interest, but the only interest for me is that it's not particularly useful.

So, I would ask what limits does your fairness stretch to? Which ideas can be considered 'implausible'? On what grounds can the decision between plausible and implausible be made?


> p.s. as we speak, Scotland Yard investigators are
> busily 'conspiracy
> theorising' about who may have carried out these
> attacks. (that is what they
> do, in case you didn't know)

I'm afraid I do place more trust in the Scotland Yard investgators than someone sitting at home like Madsen who seems to have been watching the events on TV wearing a paper hat with 'detective' written on in biro.

Simon

___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list