It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: World Leaders Pledge United Front against Terror after London Blasts

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Leaders attending the G8 summit have expressed their anger and shock over the horrible deadly blast in London and claim they are now more determined then ever to crush the terrorist threat around the world. The G8 nations include Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States as well as those of guest countries China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa who expressed similar views. In addition Spain has offered its unconditional help to the United Kingdom to pursue the criminals who have carried out this shameful attack.
 



news.yahoo.com
The Group of Eight most industrialized nations declared at their summit in Gleneagles, Scotland that Thursday's "barbaric" London bombings were attacks on the civilized world and said they would stand together to defeat militants.

"We condemn utterly these barbaric attacks," the G8 said in a statement read by the visibly shaken summit host, British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

"We are united in our resolve to confront and defeat this terrorism. This is not an attack on one nation, but on all nations and on civilized people everywhere," Blair said, flanked by the leaders of G8 nations Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States as well as those of guest countries China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa.

US President George W. Bush vowed in a separate statement to reporters in Gleneagles that the war on terrorism would continue until "an ideology of hate" had been overcome.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I wonder if this is just the normal rhetoric we see after a group of terrorist’s attacks or is it perhaps the timing and location of the attacks that may have brought the world to a greater resolve regarding terrorists? I know it sure would make me think, if it happened only minutes away from where I was. I was also surprised to see China on the list of names that were so fast to speak out; it normally takes them one or two days to let their feelings be known.

I doubt we will see added support in Iraq, but a more uniform alliance by all nations against terror can only be seen as a good thing.


Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
ALERT! Series of Explosions Rock London
TERRORISM: Israeli Finance Minister Warned To Remain At Hotel

[edit on 7-7-2005 by John bull 1]

[edit on 9-7-2005 by John bull 1]




posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 12:26 PM
link   
This could mark the infant stage of merging industrialized countries to form a one world government based on these bombing attacks. We should pay close attention to G8 nations who might form a new military alliance to entirely occupy the middle-east in some kind of repercussion action plan.

A probable theory I suppose..


[edit on 7-7-2005 by syntaxer]



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 12:33 PM
link   
I would say this is mostly lip service. The countries already helping out are doing alot behind the scenes already. I doubt this is going to get the US any help in Iraq. This is a different and difficult type of war. You cannot invade one country and achieve victory and eliminate the threat. This war will go on for a long time. How long was the war between britain and the ira? This is the type of war we have found ourselves in.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I wonder how Chirac is feeling? At the beginning of this week he hated English food and yesteray he hated the English (London 2012). Does he really feel sorry? Maybe he is glad that Paris did not get the Olympics as they could have been bombed.

I think the terrorists have shot themselves in the foot as there is now a much stronger and united alliance of "democratic" nations against them.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 01:05 PM
link   
Sooooo... What does this attack, the Madrid train bombings, WTC, countless numbers of bus bombs, Bali, and a plethera of others all have in common????? Bueller?? Anyone???



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Couple these bombings with the murder of the Egyptian (Ambassador) and recent actions by Al-Queda seem disjointed, uncoordinated and downright counterproductive to their stated goals. It is difficult for me to believe both acts were committed by the same group. In any case, these actions can only benefit the U.S. in its fight against terrorism.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Astronomer68
Couple these bombings with the murder of the Egyptian (Ambassador) and recent actions by Al-Queda seem disjointed, uncoordinated and downright counterproductive to their stated goals. It is difficult for me to believe both acts were committed by the same group.


Well, Al-Queda is a network not monolithic group with central command. I highly doubt one part even knows what the other plans or who they are.... It's ore like a lot of terroristic groups with their own leaders and finances. The only thing they have common it's ideology.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
Well, Al-Queda is a network not monolithic group with central command. I highly doubt one part even knows what the other plans or who they are.... It's ore like a lot of terroristic groups with their own leaders and finances. The only thing they have common it's ideology.


You could well be entirely correct in your statement. If you are though, it sure points up the need for some sort of coordination.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 03:10 PM
link   
My sincere condolences to the victims and their families of this cowardly terrorist actions in London.


I hope justice will prevail in bringing in the Islamic terrorists responsible for this criminal acts and murder, dead or alive.



posted on Jul, 7 2005 @ 04:11 PM
link   
I pray for the families...

now as to the circumstances...
has any confirmed group claimed these? that is the point of terrorism...
so where are the claims...

don't give me that "secret european AQ crap" either... mentioning on one obscure website does not a claim make...

but isn't that so conveniant? Now bush has support.... (boy howdy... the european secret AQ sure didn't see that result comming.... NAH....)

God bless the pawns...
sorry if this offends anyone... since we are talking about lots of injured and dead...
but lets weigh the information ourselves as it comes out and not assume ANYTHING...


[edit on 7-7-2005 by LazarusTheLong]



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by syntaxer
This could mark the infant stage of merging industrialized countries to form a one world government based on these bombing attacks. We should pay close attention to G8 nations who might form a new military alliance to entirely occupy the middle-east in some kind of repercussion action plan.

A probable theory I suppose..


[edit on 7-7-2005 by syntaxer]


I agree, I think US will gain more support from the int'l community for war against terrorism. As sad and complicated the war is, its about time the world community realizes the effort of US to fight terrorism. There is output from the efforts of US.

The war is a long-term plan. Till a safe govt. is set up in corrupted countries, and education is injected with full effort into the young minds, who have no priveledge of education seems to be the KEY factor, in a better socially responsible world.

It looks like "enemy threat" is creating a very solid alliance between the western countries/communities. A good outcome in a very sad way...

My condolences to the families and victims of this unaccebtable, cowardly attack..

Amirs


dh

posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by syntaxer
This could mark the infant stage of merging industrialized countries to form a one world government based on these bombing attacks. We should pay close attention to G8 nations who might form a new military alliance to entirely occupy the middle-east in some kind of repercussion action plan.

A probable theory I suppose..


[edit on 7-7-2005 by syntaxer]


This is precisely the point
This is why the G8 mobsters employed their agents to pull this stunt off at the time and place where the World Government cause and the occupation of other nations would be best promoted

I cant imagine this would be the deciding factor

One more contrivance in the US, I would imagine will seal the deal



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   
dh : I think you need to take something for that paranoia.

There are loonies in the world who think the solution to problems is to blow people up and Britain, especially London, has been the victim of that for decades i.e. the IRA. Now its the turn of the islamic fundamentalists.

The problem is if the government over react and become too draconian in its efforts to protect their citizens. At the other extreme of course you have the PC folk who would scream and shout at the slightest infringement of civil freedom. There is balance somewhere in-between that needs to be struck because the threat is real. Paranoid and extreme folks always tend to forget about attacks that have been committed in places and against people who by no stretch of the imagination can be linked to a "G8 world order conspiracy".



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
US President George W. Bush vowed in a separate statement to reporters in Gleneagles that the war on terrorism would continue until "an ideology of hate" had been overcom.


well it's gonna be a long war then. hate is not something that war is realy good at solveing, in fact war tends to build up even more hate, ON BOTH SIDES. those who suffer from attacks either by terrorists or even by those who are combatting terrorisim end up with more hate for the "other side". so if it's hate that is needed to be gotten rid of then WAR IS NOT A GOOD ANSWER. in fact considdering that when it comes to terrorisim one tends to have problems identifying who is an actual enimy as it is not like a country is at war with you. then when someone that is not connected with terrorisim gets hurt or has family/friends hurt then there is a greater chance that they will side with those that are opposed to those that have caused said hurt. possibly createing yet one more terrorist that needs to be "taken care of".

it is like a big vicious circle. or like the hydra of myth, cut off one head and multiple heads will grow to take it's place. all thats needed is for one to just even FEEL that they have been hurt unjustly. it could even be as simple as say a person who is of arab decent who gets a second look just once too often and feels that he is hated or even that his possible religion is hated. next thing you know he is sideing with those that he is possibly seen to be a part of. or it could even be someone who feels the hatred against himself when within minutes of an attack hears that a spacific religious group must be responsible before any real evidance is even collected forget analized. in fact it is far easyer to create the type of hate that produces terrorists then to solve it.

add to the mix the problem of people continuasely hearing about all the wrongs that have been done to them, especialy over something like religion and you create an enviroment where people learn that there is only one way to fight back in self defence. so while one trys to fight such a group you unwittingly add yet more people to their cause. all that is needed is to even just to have the perception of unfareness or hatred towards any spacific group. like i said it's a vicious circle. one that war tends to have the opposit effect than is intended. instead of stopping it you may end up makeing the situation even worse.

one of the biggest problems in fighting terrorisim is knowing just who is a terrorist. it could be you, me, the guy sitting next to us, in fact it could be anyone. untill they act therte is no real way of knowing. thats what makes a terrerist so effective. the fact that they don't wear a sign saying "terrorist here" but could be anyone or even no one. and if you should choose wrong not only do you harm an innocent but you may have just created what you are fighting. even just by say imprissoning an innocent as a terrorist you run the risk that even if they are innocent now that because of what will be seen as a wrongfull accusation you may just plant that seed of hatred within them. they may begin to see the "unjustness" of what has been done to them thus createing at the least a sympothy or understanding of why a terrorist becomes one . that seed of hate may end up growing and causeing the individual to possibly just support the very terrorists that he was accused of being or even may become one himself. then there are those who are taught about the wrongs that have been done to them which yet again plants that seed of hate that can bloom into terrorist leanings or terrorisim it's self.



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Nothing but empty words as far as I am concerned. This War on Terrorism is as unattainable as the recently defunkt War on Drugs. Any one who thinks this terrorism is solvable with military action is deluded.

And those criticising Dh are pretty closeminded for a major conspiracy website user. If you take objection to his theories you might want to examine your reasons for frequenting these boards.



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by malcr

At the other extreme of course you have the PC folk who would scream and shout at the slightest infringement of civil freedom. There is balance somewhere in-between that needs to be struck because the threat is real. Paranoid and extreme folks always tend to forget about attacks that have been committed in places and against people who by no stretch of the imagination can be linked to a "G8 world order conspiracy".


I assume by 'PC' you mean politically correct. If so, why is this a prerequisite for loving one's civil liberties. Check out the philosophy of libertarianism.

Why should my rights and those of millions of others be abated due to the actions of a very few?

'Government for the people, by the people...', we miss you dearly...



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by drogo

Originally posted by shots
US President George W. Bush vowed in a separate statement to reporters in Gleneagles that the war on terrorism would continue until "an ideology of hate" had been overcom.


well it's gonna be a long war then. hate is not something that war is realy good at solveing, in fact war tends to build up even more hate, ON BOTH SIDES. those who suffer from attacks either by terrorists or even by those who are combatting terrorisim end up with more hate for the "other side". so if it's hate that is needed to be gotten rid of then WAR IS NOT A GOOD ANSWER. in fact considdering that when it comes to terrorisim one tends to have problems identifying who is an actual enimy as it is not like a country is at war with you. then when someone that is not connected with terrorisim gets hurt or has family/friends hurt then there is a greater chance that they will side with those that are opposed to those that have caused said hurt. possibly createing yet one more terrorist that needs to be "taken care of".

it is like a big vicious circle. or like the hydra of myth, cut off one head and multiple heads will grow to take it's place. all thats needed is for one to just even FEEL that they have been hurt unjustly. it could even be as simple as say a person who is of arab decent who gets a second look just once too often and feels that he is hated or even that his possible religion is hated. next thing you know he is sideing with those that he is possibly seen to be a part of. or it could even be someone who feels the hatred against himself when within minutes of an attack hears that a spacific religious group must be responsible before any real evidance is even collected forget analized. in fact it is far easyer to create the type of hate that produces terrorists then to solve it.

add to the mix the problem of people continuasely hearing about all the wrongs that have been done to them, especialy over something like religion and you create an enviroment where people learn that there is only one way to fight back in self defence. so while one trys to fight such a group you unwittingly add yet more people to their cause. all that is needed is to even just to have the perception of unfareness or hatred towards any spacific group. like i said it's a vicious circle. one that war tends to have the opposit effect than is intended. instead of stopping it you may end up makeing the situation even worse.

one of the biggest problems in fighting terrorisim is knowing just who is a terrorist. it could be you, me, the guy sitting next to us, in fact it could be anyone. untill they act therte is no real way of knowing. thats what makes a terrerist so effective. the fact that they don't wear a sign saying "terrorist here" but could be anyone or even no one. and if you should choose wrong not only do you harm an innocent but you may have just created what you are fighting. even just by say imprissoning an innocent as a terrorist you run the risk that even if they are innocent now that because of what will be seen as a wrongfull accusation you may just plant that seed of hatred within them. they may begin to see the "unjustness" of what has been done to them thus createing at the least a sympothy or understanding of why a terrorist becomes one . that seed of hate may end up growing and causeing the individual to possibly just support the very terrorists that he was accused of being or even may become one himself. then there are those who are taught about the wrongs that have been done to them which yet again plants that seed of hate that can bloom into terrorist leanings or terrorisim it's self.


Exactly, you think the american public is complaining now to pull our troops out, were going to be there for a very long time. Seen as terrorism has been going on (maybe in different forms) for the past 50 years, we might then be stuck there for 50 more years. Alot of people still think that iraq might help us, but how long do we have to wait? Till were all 50 or older? But it's all about martrydom, if a few terrorists die, then they'll be hundreds, if not thousands left. We can't kill ALL muslims can we? I kinda think sometime in the near future, this scenario may happen. Terrorism will just stop, and no one will no why. No one will ask questions and everyone will go back to there lives, with no more threats or bombings. Anyway, i've always wondered who's pulling all the strings here.



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Ahhhh....

The Forming of the N.W.O. has started....



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Hey I've got a new theory, maybe there are nutters out there that frequently bomb their own people and like to extend this to the western civilised world for some twisted ideas revolving around reasons they seem to love blaming on religon.

Maybe our governents, and this is the clincher, are actually trying to protect us!! (Mad I know) and maybe sometimes they make mistakes.

Even more insane is the possibilty that there are actullay corrupt people within the government and other positions of power, that try and bend things to their own ends, but do not necessarily represent the will of the body. Much as there are in all walks of life and is something we will sadly never see the back of.

Maybe the general public can't be given all details of intelligance because by doing so it would give away strategic information relating to which groups are infiltrated and possible revealing sources and causing a behind the scenes reshuffling resulting in us knowing even less we do now.

There is a rather hideous website which has been around for years which loves publishing video and photos of rather nasty things, including mainly terrorist attack aftermaths, most of them in the middle east.
I can't give it out because of the graohic material, but if you saw it you might change your mind as to wherever they exist or not.
When you think about what they did yesterday it was scarily simple. If you have the basic knowledge then the average Joe (here in England) can buy the materials and make rather nasty devices, luckily most people are sane enough not to.
The IRA used to do it all the time to us, remember?

We don't have to worry abouit being controlled, we already are - they are trying to make the best of a bad situation and sort it out.
Your always going to get scandels and corrupt people somewhere, just because one thing is exposed it doesn't mean it's all bad.




[edit on 8-7-2005 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 03:57 PM
link   
I'm thinking the only thing they truly share is rhetoric and operating procedures. The only shared ideaology is a central thug using a religion to build his power and influence at the expense of anyone he sees fit.


Originally posted by longbow

Well, Al-Queda is a network not monolithic group with central command. I highly doubt one part even knows what the other plans or who they are.... It's ore like a lot of terroristic groups with their own leaders and finances. The only thing they have common it's ideology.







 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join