a.)
b.)
c.)
Posted on 07/21/2005 12:35:51 PM PDT by Pyro7480
The London Bombings: How the U.S. and the U.K. Should Respond
by Nile Gardiner, Ph.D., and James Phillips
July 21, 2005 (link to PDF)
Thursday, July 7, 2005, will go down as one of the darkest days in British history since the Second World War. At least 55 people were killed in a series of bomb blasts in the heart of London, and several hundred were injured.
The July 7 attacks were followed by a series of near simultaneous minor bomb blasts on public transportation in the British capital, involving detonators, on July 21. Although there were no fatalities, the attacks caused widespread disruption to the London subway network....
What the U.K. and the U.S. Should Do
In response to the London bombings, the British government should:
-Strengthen British anti-terrorism laws.... Greater powers should be given to British authorities to detain suspected terrorists, and the U.K. should immediately withdraw from provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights that might act as a barrier to effective anti-terrorism measures. The British government should strongly consider implementing counterterrorist laws pioneered by the United States in the PATRIOT Act.
-Follow a policy of zero tolerance for Islamic extremism. Britain... must no longer tolerate the Islamic militancy in its midst, which seeks to destroy British society and impose a Muslim state....
-Reverse Britain’s defense cuts....
The governments of the United States and the United Kingdom should jointly:
-Coordinate London and Washington’s Anti-Terrorist Lists. There is a striking discrepancy between the U.S. and U.K. lists of international terrorist organizations. (See Appendix 1.)
Stay the course in Iraq....
Press Pakistan to root out Islamic extremist groups....
Take the war to the terrorists....
(Excerpt) Read more at heritage.org ...
Coordinate London and Washington’s Anti-Terrorist Lists. There is a striking discrepancy between the U.S. and U.K. lists of international terrorist organizations. (See Appendix 1.) The U.K. list omits over 15 organizations classified as terrorist groups by the U.S. Department of State. Washington and London should carefully coordinate their lists of proscribed groups and present a united position in the global war on terrorism.
The easiest first step is the coordination of these lists.
I hope "start racial profiling" is an addition.
While they're at it, they could standardize their spelling.
Enough wimpy responses, MOAB em.
Nuke 'em All ~ Bump!
What the U.K. and the U.S. Should Do
Purge civilization of arab/paki islamics. Any others will get the message.
Australia and Canada would be wise to do so, too.
I was really enjoying the article until I came upon to that statement.
If the author doesn't know enough about Islam and its history to know that statement is baloney, then I wonder about his conclusions.
a.)
b.)
c.)
Blah blah blah, more words.
Another article about Jihad that omits Saudi.
Perfect for wrapping fish and chips in.
It's conservative political correctness. I don't doubt his conclusions are sound though.
Close down all the mosques, which preach hate and murder. If they don't like it, go back to whatever ME sh1thole you or your parents came from.
Saudi Arabia doesn't have anything directly to do with London, other than funding some of the madrassas where the terrorists were "educated."
Sorry, "....they or their parents came from."
Its time to unleash the soccer hooligans on these muzzie bastards. Either the muzzies police thier own ranks and get rid of the terrorists themselves or we get rid of all muzzies. Open up your country to these bastards and this is what we get? Over my dead body! Time for all muzzies to put up or shut up (or get out).
You may be right about his conclusions but I sure am losing patience with that PC Bu!!sh!t.
Right. Let's keep fighting jihad but allow the purveyors of ideology and funds to keep indoctrinating and funding the people who want to kill everyone.
I still believe the proper tact is to declare any imam, mosque, or group who preachs destruction of the country or war against the country to be "outlaw" or outside the protection of the laws of the country. Following this, any citizen could then take any action necessary to correct the problem without concern for legal consequences.
Since these pos do not want to recognize or obey our laws, why should they then have the protection our laws provide?
"He served as an aide to Lady Thatcher from 2000 to 2002, and advised her on a number of international policy issues."
I figure if Lady Thatcher was still in charge those children wouldn't dream of playing in tunnels and on buses.
God bless her.
Maybe we could start by "eminent domaining" the terrorist's mosques.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.