The London Bombers have been ID'ed...

[JPaul]

Profiling is standard practice in the investigation of any crime, it is a remarkably useful tool. Rather than just looking at the community as a whole it allows the authorities to focus on specific areas.

The fact of the matter is that these attacks, the co-ordination, the lack of warning had the hallmarks of certain groups. It was therefore natural for the Police to look in those areas, whilst the forensics were ongoing.

In my mind they almost certainly already knew of these people and had intelligence on them, how else do you think they were identified so quickly.

So if you then look at the active groups you are aware of and find out that certain people are missing (feck one was reported as missing in London by his family) you have a very good idea who was responsible. So you focus even tighter and find that these chaps travelled to London on the day and that they were carrying rucksacks and they were in the places at the times.

RF - I think that this will make change less likely, or at least slow it. We wouldn't want them to think that their actions had achieved what they sought to achieve. Which I am not entirely clear on anyway. Could someone enlighten me, what is this actually supposed to achieve. Has there been some sort of statment " We are murdering people because .... so if you .... we will stop."

[Barbarossa]

RF - I think that this will make change less likely, or at least slow it. We wouldn't want them to think that their actions had achieved what they sought to achieve. Which I am not entirely clear on anyway. Could someone enlighten me, what is this actually supposed to achieve. Has there been some sort of statment " We are murdering people because .... so if you .... we will stop."

I haven't heard of any link yet between these 4 guys, and either of the 2(?) Islamic websites that claimed responsibility last thursday. I guess that's one of the things the on-going investigation is trying to find out..

[JPaul]

RF - I think that this will make change less likely, or at least slow it. We wouldn't want them to think that their actions had achieved what they sought to achieve. Which I am not entirely clear on anyway. Could someone enlighten me, what is this actually supposed to achieve. Has there been some sort of statment " We are murdering people because .... so if you .... we will stop."

I haven't heard of any link yet between these 4 guys, and either of the 2(?) Islamic websites that claimed responsibility last thursday. I guess that's one of the things the on-going investigation is trying to find out..

Indeed.

To find out who else was involved.

Apparently there has been an arrest in Egypt. A man who studied chemistry in the Leeds area. He also rented a flat to one of the murderers. I think he may have been in the area (Leeds) recently, tho' I have only heard sketchy reports.

[vidcc]

I misunderstood the broadcast; my impression was that emigres were involved-I was not aware they were native-born.

One wonders, though, whence came the influences which swayed them...

That is why I made the point about it being possible that influence of nationals comes from immigrants as a connection to immigration and your thread.

I disagree somewhat.

A short while ago, I listened to Tom Friedman (whom I find a bit misguided but sincere and occasionally insightful) utter the most succinct summation of the current situation that I have heard-I will try to get this as close as possible:

"For many decades, our foreign policy vis a vis the mideast was simple-keep the oil flowing, and at a reasonable price, be nice to the Israelis, we will prop up tin-pot dictators like Saddam, ignore the excesses of the Shah, AND, we will overlook what goes on 'out back'.

This went on, frustrations built, and on 9/11, what went on 'out back' finally came back and bit us on the ass."

We have now, for better or worse, depending on who you believe, decided the more prudent course is to provide the stewardship which was absent from our previous policy; we will foment as genuine a version of democracy as the natives can muster, and we will no longer take the easy route of supporting the first strong-man to come down the pike.

The other issues remain integral to our foreign policy.

As can easily be seen, the price to be paid in order that we may support democracy is (in the short-run, at least) higher in terms of lives and money.



This is only roughly descriptive; but I am short on time, for which oversight I apologize..

We seem to have changed foreign policy to a degree but I would charge that the method is as important as the deed (if that makes sense)

bringing about democracy is indeed something good...doing it by force may not be the best way to achieve it and as we can see may be creating as many problems as it solves. There are many things we haven't changed . We support oppressive regimes because it is in our own interests.
In the Israel situation instead of being neutral we still favour a definite side. Interference no matter how well intentioned can be resented. The USA would never stand for interference from outside, why would one assume everyone else would embrace it.

We do indeed need to stop propping up dictators and ignoring the "background", however Instead of stewardship at the end of a gun I feel that allowing them to be masters of their own destiny would remove many "terrorist dangers" from US.

To focus on "the issues which spawn the acts" is closing the barn door after the nag has taken her leave, or, in a way, reminiscent of latent guilt over slavery; too little, too late, and a total waste of time.

Are you saying that we should just continue without addressing those issues?
To use the word "focus" would seem that you think that is all i am saying we need to do, which is not the case at all...it is one of the things we need to do...better late than never.
I know that there are some here that absolutely refuse to think that we did anything wrong and that to change the way we do things would be to "give in to terrorists"...I see it as preventative medicine against future attacks.
As with your post this is but a tiny fraction of the issue

[JPaul]

Democracy may indeed be good, I certainly think so, but not all people choose it.

[vidcc]

Democracy may indeed be good, I certainly think so, but not all people choose it.

I agree and although I didn't say this directly I did say I favour people being masters of their own destiny, removing the issue of us deciding the direction they should take.

Edit:
This doesn't mean we should ignore genocide