i am not convinced that this was AQ. in fact, i am starting to have a terrible fear that it could have been done by a group who wants the UK to “stay the course” in Iraq.

fear is the greatest tool of those who wish to control. what better way to create fear than a terroist attack?

No contrast here, Teddy. Neither deserve “politeness” and neither deserve to be tortured. To add to a point made above: Osama bin Laden and Karl Rove can go fuck themselves.

I suspect that most of the world population view the current American administration as mass murderers, war criminals and perpetrators of crimes against humanity. And for a good reason.

But we know enough about Rove to get some estimate whether he belongs in jail.

The difference is that Rove is a public figure, while the terrorists are as anonymous as they can manage.

No, I assign to Rove the ownership of a cult.
He is, if you like, the Big Ron to GWB’s Little Tommy.
And once again, I wasn’t necessarily recommending “humane treatment” (though I will. Why not? Acting inhumanely diminishes the actor. I wouldn’t torture, so I decline to order others to.) to the assassins, but to their associates, to people half-in, half-out of the organisation. “Weak links” was my term. Surely even “teddy” wouldn’t assign a bombing mission to a weak link?

On another note, you’ve had more than minimal politeness. You’ve sought to twist what I said, and that’s dishonourable. What I think of you is considerably worse than what I’ve said.

Karl Rove can look after himself. Let’s hope he does so, from a cell, soon.

I’ve read more than enough John Yoo as it is, thanks very much:

‘As Yoo saw it, Congress doesn’t have the power to “tie the President’s hands in regard to torture as an interrogation technique.” He continued, “It’s the core of the Commander-in-Chief function. They can’t prevent the President from ordering torture.”’

Well, if terrorists who massacred people in London deserve “humane treatment”, I thought (naively) that Karl Rove and I were then also entitled to minimal politeness.

To paraphrase our minimally polite Vice President, Karl Rove can go fuck himself.

London is bigger than this, we took on the blitz & beat the German Elite, the IRA (in 200 years) did not stop us & now these cowards are not going to phase us! If they think they are tough lets issue a challenge…come on guys, one on one – lets see how tough you really are! The truth is, they are very tough when thay are talking amongst themselves…lets see how they fair when they get into a street environment! The gauntlet is down, you want a fight…bring it on

Dave suggests that I am stupid just because I agreed with Karl Rove on something. Well, if terrorists who massacred people in London deserve “humane treatment”, I thought (naively) that Karl Rove and I were then also entitled to minimal politeness.

Interestingly, Dave says that the London murderers belong to a “cult”, and he also refers to Karl Rove as a member of a “cult”. It speaks volumes that the same word is used in these two cases.

The opposite tack, Putin’s approach to Chechnya, has a much greater chance of success, after ten years of continuous triumph?

Besides, you deliberately (for you seem intelligent) distorted what I said. It’s a gang. Or perhaps a cult. Or both. To break up a gang you go for the weak links. You turn them by being human. Then, when they realise that they can have a life outside the cult, they’ll tell you stuff. There’s a long history of this working.

“Boy, was Karl Rove right ” Did I say you seemed intelligent? Oh well.

Karl Rove is interestede in gestures and theatre. His little cult has confessed to not being interested in results. We normal vulnerable people have to be.

I think it’s more likely they’d think we’d be resolved to stay in iraq than that they’d think we’d be more likely to pull out—independent of how we actually respond. But it’s anybody’s guess how they predict.