London Terrorists: "right next to a group of Muslim girls"
I did not see this reported in mainstream media: if true, it is worthy of wide attention. Did the wannabe bomber feel safer sitting next to Muslim girls? Did he think they would be less suspicious of him? Or that other passengers would notice him less? Did he especially want to kill "bad" Muslims--i.e., any Muslim who is not in his cell?
Suggestions? I see it as more evidence that the killers are nihilists; their only "cause" is the destruction of humanity itself.
I was travelling back from a meeting in Westbourne Park on the Hammersmith and City line, I have avoided tubes and buses since the 7th and been really careful not to travel in commuter hours. The train was by no means busy, every second seat was empty.
As we went over the bridge, approaching Shepherd's Bush I heard what sounded like a small gunshot. Nobody reacted till about 30 seconds later when we noticed a disturbance in the next carriage. Suddenly we saw that smoke was filling the carriage and people were very distressed. The train stopped on the bridge and a male passenger opened the internal doors to let in the people from the effected carriage.
What I distinctly remember was a group of young teenage girls in long black headscarves and gowns, who had been next to the bomb, coming into our carriage they sat down and were rocking back and forth, I will remember the noise one of them made for the rest of my life, she was moaning out of pure horror and terror.
What needs to be reported in the media is that the bomber had left a rucksack right next to a group of Muslim girls.
UPDATE#1: A British friend writes: "Two Muslims I know told me that it is assumed that bombers will seek out other Muslims on a bus or train so as to hide in cover." Smart tactics, I suppose, but another sign of "pure evil." Or is this an urban legend; anybody have any sources on this?
UPDATE#2: Reply to Athena. I have said many times here that the Jihadists are Totalitarians who want to rule the world (as they have wished to do for some 1300 years). That means, of course, that no appeasement or compromise (e.g., "resolving the Palestinian question"), which is the mantra of the left and the alleged "moderate" Muslim leaders, will do any real good. Totalitarians will never be satisfied with anything less than everything.
UPDATE#3: Reply to Athena. No disagreement that resolutions to some major boiling pots in the regions will be useful. But problems abound. First, the Jihadists will just move on to new grievances (which will be championed by the Muslim press and the Western left as the "root cause" of terror du jour). Second, the "solutions" you might think equitable will outrage them: they want to rule Iraq and Afghanistan, destroy Israel, topple the governments of Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, and, yes, rule the entire world. Third, by your logic we should not bother killing or arresting any terrorists/insurgents/etc. since there will always be more.
Look, I respect your views, but it's a paradigm chasm between us: you see terrorism as a social and diplomatic problem; I see it as but one front in a Total War for survival. I would suggest though, that the Jihadis have the latter view, in which case, the first view is moot.
Note: See Athena's reply in comment section.
Comments