June 29, 2007


London police defuse bomb that could've caused 'significant damage' (AP, 6/29/07)

British police defused a bomb found in a parked car in central London on Friday, and the new government called an emergency meeting of senior security chiefs to investigate what many feared could have been a planned terror attack.

A British security official told The Associated Press that the car was packed with explosives, gas canisters and nuts and bolts and would have caused "significant damage."

He said there were similarities between the device and vehicle bombs used by insurgents in Iraq.

Posted by Orrin Judd at June 29, 2007 6:46 AM

I wonder if it came from the religion of peace? I'm thinking more of anti-Craig Biggio fans just trying to make a statement.

Posted by: pchuck at June 29, 2007 7:23 AM

It is those damn Presbyterians again.

Posted by: sam at June 29, 2007 8:06 AM

If only they'd secured their southern border . . .

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at June 29, 2007 8:52 AM

"If only they'd secured their southern border"

I knew the Welsh we behind this.

Posted by: Bryan at June 29, 2007 11:39 AM

Well, the Welsh are to the West. Must've been the Cornish!! Uh, Cornwallians!! Cornwalloons!!

Posted by: Twn at June 29, 2007 4:08 PM

A 2nd bomb has been found and defused. Evidently the first one was in a Mercedes. There must be a clever statement in there somewhere, but I don't have it today. A car bomb that could have killed "hundreds" is a very serious piece of work.

Posted by: ratbert at June 29, 2007 6:14 PM

A car bomb that didn't work and wasn't likely to do much damage is serious from the perspective of the few, but trivial as a geo-political matter. It's a demonstration of weakness.

Posted by: oj at June 29, 2007 9:14 PM

You jest because it didn't explode. 500 dead from two explosions isn't "trivial".

Sure, it's not Verdun or Iwo Jima (or even the Katyn Forest), but bombs like this are the elixir of the modern terrorist. Especially if they were created by a cell or bombmaker with links to Iraq (and more importantly, to Iran).

Posted by: ratbert at June 29, 2007 10:00 PM

Yes, but they have marginal utility. What would a successful bombing have achieved?

Posted by: oj at June 29, 2007 11:57 PM

What would a sucessful bombing have achieved? That depends on who is bombed. Ask Saddam Hussein what 9-11 achieved, except you can't ask him.

Bring them on. Do they really want us to start playing Cowboys and sand critters? Let them ask the Japanese how that game ends.

Do they want another taste of, "Nun Volk steht auf, und Sturm bricht los?*
*"Now people rise up, and storm break loose," from the time of the rising against Napoleon after the French retreat from Russia and preparatory to the the Battle of Leipzig, or from America after the twin towers.

Posted by: Lou Gots at June 30, 2007 1:26 AM

Certainly not what my wife is achieving while playing a timeless Bill Evans piece on her Steinway grand piano!

England, hopefully, is not Spain.

Posted by: Randall Voth at June 30, 2007 2:22 AM

If the bombs cause the Labor Party to revert, they will have achieved something. On the other hand, they could move the Conservatives to revert as well. The choice is theirs to make.

Any comment from Red Ken? Or was he busy making appearances with terror enablers?

Posted by: ratbert at June 30, 2007 8:36 AM