Seven near-simultaneous bomb attacks in London is a formidable feat for Al-Qaeda and its partners-in-murder.
Letters are now flowing to the BBC, challenging them to characterize the carnage as anything but terrorism, seeing that the news organization tends to soft-pedal terrorism that happens to others. So far, they've avoided using the term in anything but attributed quotes, e.g., Blair's. They also write that the victims "died." We'll see if the British public notices.
A scan of the British press finds the following:
- The Telegraph characterizes it as terror bombs... that "killed" people.
- The Financial Times writes of a "series of terrorist attacks" that "killed"
- The Guardian headlines "terror blasts" that "killed"
- The Times (of London) noted that the "blasts" "brought" terror to London, "killing" people.
- The Scotsman is most unvarnished: "More than 33 killed in ... terror attacks"
Meanwhile, there are lots of heavily armed security troops visible at Grand Central (where I had my lunch today), and I suspect Penn Station will be fortified as well.
Most newspapers believe that the attacks were intended to coincide with the G8 summit in Scotland, but I find it curious that nobody sees the connection with the announcement of the venue for the 2012 Olympic Games.
That would seem a plausible explanation, since it would create the impression in the public mind that Al Qaeda has the capability to launch a large-scale attack in any one of several cities on a day's notice.