Replies

“Apparently, the UK is upset that somewhere, someone, just might do something to stop Islamic terror.”
*************************************************
I guess that you believe the leakers to the New York Times, as well as the NYT itself, are on the side of the angels and want to do all they can to motivate the Brits to uncover all the Islamist conspirators involved in this monstrous act? And you think the U.K. investigators are trying to avoid uncovering ALL involved conspirators and stopping Islamic terrorism.

You couldn't be more wrong about both the leakers and the New York Times. And you're wrong about the U.K. It will not be the first time you're completely wrong and deficient in your thinking.

You couldn't be more wrong about both the leakers and the New York Times.

I am absolutely astonished at how many folks in this forum left their brains with the hat check girl before logging in here. No sane person could possibly justify the leaking of intelligence of any kind after the damage to our country that has been perpetrated by this.

And yet here they are, somehow distinguishing between "good" leaks and "bad" leaks. I will presume that the intel being divulged on this bombing is sensitive info by organizations trying to track down all the ins and outs of this assault on the civilized world. We didn't just leak most wanted posters or the Manchester police blotter [old lady reports stray dog in park across street. Investigated, no dog found].