Knitting. Yarn. Fiber artistry. More knitting. Nursing school. Hospice work. Death and the dying process. Phoenix Raven's. Knitting. Yarn. Oh, and Life As An Air Force Wife.

Link

Am I the only one who finds his statement about the London bombings offensive?

It's like I said -- 40 people dead, 150 seriously wounded, 1,000 wounded, out of over 1 million people in that transit tube. It's not a successful terrorist attack, folks.

So, if that wasn't a 'successfuk' attack, what is?  Are there guidelines about what constitutes a 'successful' attack versus an 'unsuccessful' one?

Pull you head out of your arse, Rush.  People DIED.  People were INJURED.  It's not about how big it was or how many people didn't die.  Terrorism is terrorism, regardless of the scale.  To me, an unsuccessful attack would be one where bombs didn't detonate, or where the bombers were caught before they could complete their plan.

Londoners and Englishmen will prevail, they will not be intimidated so in that respect the terrorists didn't get what they had hoped for....but to make statments like that almost belittling the incident....

....that's just disrespectful.

 

 

 


Comments (Page 2)
6 Pages1 2 3 4  Last
on Jul 10, 2005
I think Rush twists things to get as many 'hell yeah's' that he can from his core following, while trying to offend as many who hate him as possible. I tend to agree with his opinions, but I do think he treads heavily on the emotions of people when he could show a lot more respect.

Whether the attack was successful or not depends entirely on how the British people react. If they are terrorized and terrorists benefit, then it was. If they aren't, and the antagonism ends up harming the terrorists' agenda, then it wasn't successful.

The problem wasn't so much that he was rating the success of the attack as he was using the overall weight of the carnage to do it. The only people who keep real score are the people back in the Middle East who cheer FOR these wastes of skin.

So, in a way, Rush is right, and wrong. In terms of propaganda power, a high death toll probably gets them more cheers and support at home. Here, though, it is a toughe nut to crack as far as terror and response. They could kill and handful and do real harm, or they could kill a lot and just bring hell down on themselves.
on Jul 10, 2005

 

No, I wouldn't call the WTC attacks on 9/11 a failure because the towers and the pentagon weren't the target, the financial and military infrastructure of the western world. It took a few years to recover from those attacks, to the death toll and the loss of property (both running deep), the outcome was successful.

This attack did not kill thousands (as it could have), it was not big enough to disrupt the infrastructure of England and from what I am reading, it did not destroy the spirit of the British people

When you consider that England is the size of Texas you get a little better perspective on things.  It's a big deal over there, Ted.  It might not be as big a deal here in the US, but this is the worst attack London has seen since WWII.  That's huge to Englishmen.

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you about whose attack was worse.  That's not going to solve anything, and it's not what this blog about.

This is about Rush Limbaugh opening his big trap and saying some incredibly insensitive things.  I don't understand how anyone could read the script of the show, read what he said, and not draw a similar conclusion. 

Any terrorist act that results in the loss of human life is a successful one.  And, they're probably gloating over the fact that, yet again, thay have managed to turn the world's focus on them yet again.  Failure?  I don't freakin' think so.

Lucas:  I don't have anything nice to say to you at the moment, so I won't say anything at all.

 

on Jul 10, 2005

I do think he treads heavily on the emotions of people when he could show a lot more respect.

They haven't even removed all the bodies from the tunnels yet, and he's saying this stuff.  How insensitive can you be? 

You know, this just perpetuates the British vision of Americans.  They see a Yank telling them that their situation isn't as bad because not many people got killed.  How does anything think that makes them feel?  Emperor Of Ice Cream wrote an article last week about how he felt after 9/11, and what (I think, at least) he details in it as his stereotypical vison of America is pretty much what Rush Limbaugh epitomized in his badly worded, ill-timed statement:  'Y'all ONLY got 50 people killed? Aw, that's nothin'!  We lost thousands in our attack!'.

Don't minimize it, and don't belittle it.  That's all I'm asking for.

 

 

on Jul 10, 2005
Lucas: I don't have anything nice to say to you at the moment, so I won't say anything at all


--you have every right to say it, please, what did you wish to say, that wasn't nice....
on Jul 10, 2005
I also think that, yes the attacks were a huge deal, but, did it deter them, it doesn't seem to have...i admire the british...thats part of the reason i would like to live in england...rush's comment may have been a bit un- needed, but i don't think he meant that, i mean there have been others who have said similar, if not the very same thing...and yet they are not bashed...why?
on Jul 10, 2005
You forget Dharma, he was merely echoing the sentiments of Mayor Livingston's speech with his statement. If it is Rush Limbaugh that this is about, are you equally as disgusted with the Mayor?
on Jul 10, 2005
rush's comment may have been a bit un- needed, but i don't think he meant that, i mean there have been others who have said similar, if not the very same thing...and yet they are not bashed...why?


Because other people are not pompous, arrogant, self-righteous radio broadcasters like Rush Limbaugh.

I've done some extensive reading and TV watching in the past few days because this is a matter close to my heart (it's my homeland), and as yet I haven't seen anyone saying anything like it. If you can provide me with examples of it, please do...with links to where it was said and who said it. I'm all about equal opportunity bashing.
on Jul 10, 2005
You forget Dharma, he was merely stating the sentiments of Mayor Livingston with his statement.


If that's the case, then he did so very badly. Ken Livingstone never came out and said "this wasn't so bad, we only lost 50 people". I heard his speech when he first said it, and it wasn't anything like that. He said, as others have said recently, that the British will not be defeated, the the way of life there will remain the same, that we will not run scared. Rush was the one who made mention of the lack of casualties.
on Jul 10, 2005
I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh

I'm more of a Paul Harvey kinda guy


Funny you should mention Paul Harvey, Evorg. He said about the same thing the other day. Like Rush, he was merely echoing the sentiments of Mayor Livingston.
on Jul 10, 2005

Just to make things clear, here's the full text of the speech by Ken Livingstone:

"This was a cowardly attack, which has resulted in injury and loss of life. Our thoughts are with everyone who has been injured, or lost loved ones. I want to thank the emergency services for the way they have responded.

Following the al-Qaeda attacks on September 11 in America we conducted a series of exercises in London in order to be prepared for just such an attack. One of the exercises undertaken by the government, my office and the emergency and security services was based on the possibility of multiple explosions on the transport system during the Friday rush hour. The plan that came out of that exercise is being executed today, with remarkable efficiency and courage, and I praise those staff who are involved.

I’d like to thank Londoners for the calm way in which they have responded to this cowardly attack and echo the advice of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair - do everything possible to assist the police and take the advice of the police about getting home today.

I have no doubt whatsoever that this is a terrorist attack. We did hope in the first few minutes after hearing about the events on the Underground that it might simply be a maintenance tragedy. That was not the case. I have been able to stay in touch through the very excellent communications that were established for the eventuality that I might be out of the city at the time of a terrorist attack and they have worked with remarkable effectiveness. I will be in continual contact until I am back in London.

I want to say one thing specifically to the world today. This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever.

That isn’t an ideology, it isn’t even a perverted faith - it is just an indiscriminate attempt at mass murder and we know what the objective is. They seek to divide Londoners. They seek to turn Londoners against each other. I said yesterday to the International Olympic Committee, that the city of London is the greatest in the world, because everybody lives side by side in harmony. Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack. They will stand together in solidarity alongside those who have been injured and those who have been bereaved and that is why I’m proud to be the mayor of that city.

Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life.

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don’t want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail."

 

I see nothing in there about "you didn't kill too many of us.  we only lost 50 people, so your attack was not a success".

on Jul 10, 2005
whats funny (ironic) is that that is all of what rush said:

"They didn't succeed in doing anything, and that's just what you just heard the mayor say: "You don't scare us. You didn't accomplish diddly-squat. We've been through this before, much worse than this. And look at us -- we're in the 20th century, you're still back in the 14th century. Blah, blah, blah."

--this is what followed...and dharma, this is from the same source as yours


Link
on Jul 10, 2005
Paul Harvey has a different way of saying things, that isn't easily offensive to people. I love Paul Harvey, he's gotta be what 70 - 80 now? I wonder if I could listen to him on the internet, that would be so cool.
on Jul 10, 2005
Dharma, i think it was an interpretaion of it...and that some of the source of the outrage of rush's comment, is the prior feelings...just a thought...
on Jul 10, 2005

Paul Harvey has a different way of saying things, that isn't easily offensive to people. I love Paul Harvey, he's gotta be what 70 - 80 now? I wonder if I could listen to him on the internet, that would be so cool


--so does Rush...makes no difference, how about i get ballistic over the way PH said it...hmmm?
on Jul 10, 2005
--so does Rush...makes no difference, how about i get ballistic over the way PH said it...hmmm?


Sure go ahead I don't care, slobber all over that keyboard.


6 Pages1 2 3 4  Last