The banality of terror

A Whitehall official told The Observer that the 7/7 bombings in London “were a modest, simple affair by four seemingly normal men using the internet.”

The official inquiry into the 7 July London bombings will say the attack was planned on a shoestring budget from information on the internet, that there was no ‘fifth-bomber’ and no direct support from al-Qaeda, although two of the bombers had visited Pakistan.

The first forensic account of the atrocity that claimed the lives of 52 people, which will be published in the next few weeks, will say that attacks were the product of a ‘simple and inexpensive’ plot hatched by four British suicide bombers bent on martyrdom.

Far from being the work of an international terror network, as originally suspected, the attack was carried out by four men who had scoured terror sites on the internet. Their knapsack bombs cost only a few hundred pounds, according to the first completed draft of the government’s definitive report into the blasts.

  • Kat

    Yeah, it was just a little demonstration, and muslim history is known for demonstrations. Of course, innocents get killed and beheaded but we shouldn’t demonize the terrorists.
    {The London bombings were not acts of terrorism but “a demonstration”, according to a senior academic.
    Prof Ron Geaves has sparked controversy by claiming that the attacks on Tube trains and a bus that killed 52 innocent people in July were part of a long history of protests by British Muslims.
    He also said that to refer to the attacks as terrorism risked “demonising” those involved.} God forbid we demonize the 911 and London suiciders as the scum they are.
    This is the thinking of leftwing nutjobs, not sane people.
    {Last night Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, described Prof Geaves’s claims as “absolutely barking”. He said: “What happened on July 7, 2005, fits with every international definition of terrorism. If any of the men behind the attacks had survived the incident they would have quite rightly been tried under the anti-terror laws. I don’t think it’s helpful that we have a mealy-mouthed academic trying to justify deaths of innocent people. It is ludicrous.”}
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/04/09/nterr09.xml