International Media Respond to London Bombings

Here's a sampling of what others are saying.

The al Qaeda link to the bombings is called phony according to Aljazeera.com:

A group calling itself "The Secret Organization of Al Qaeda in Europe" posted a statement on an internet site, claiming responsibility for the deadly attacks that hit London on Thursday.

But MSNBC TV translator Jacob Keryakes said that the statement in which the group claimed responsibility for the attacks contained an error in one of the Qura'nic verses it cited. That suggests that the claim is phony, he said.

"This is not something Al Qaeda would do," he said.

The Islamist movement, Hizb ut-Tahrir, is quoted by Aljazeera.net:

"Condemnation with scant information will only aid the leaders of the West who want to use fear as a tool as well as allow them to arrest more Muslims unjustly under draconian terror laws," it said in a statement on Thursday.

"Yes, the rules of Islam do not allow the harming of innocent civilians, but at the same time the rules of Islam do not allow us to condemn Muslims with little evidence in order to remove the pressure from ourselves."

The organisation criticised the Group of Eight leaders meeting in Gleneagles, Scotland.

"The world's leaders congregating at the G8 summit in Gleneagles have quickly taken the opportunity to further their rhetoric to justify their 'war on terror'," the statement said.

From an editorial in the Arab News:

What the murderers yesterday in London and Iraq seem not to understand is that their cowardly and barbarous attacks produce only profound anger and contempt, not despair and fear. Their bombs destroy not only innocent lives but any possible claim they have to be taken as anything other than bloodstained criminals.

From Lebanon, The Daily Star asserts:

The ramifications of the terrorist attacks in London will undoubtedly be far-reaching and will be felt around the globe. They are also likely to further inspire a wave of international counter-terrorist cooperation between governments and security agencies, thus wasting valuable resources - time, money, but most importantly good will - that would have otherwise gone toward more productive endeavors.

From an op-ed in The News International, Pakistan:

The bombings are a chilling new reminder that the "First World" is just as vulnerable to terrorism as the Third, the difference being the degree of vulnerability. The London attack has brought the war home that Britain has so far been fighting in far off Iraq.

And the seven blasts may yet jolt the G8 leaders in Gleneagles into pondering over the fact that poverty and global injustice are the root causes of terrorism in the world.

Although it seems all sources currently condemn the bombings, the level of condemnation ranges from very strong to rather mild. My take is that it won't be long before we start seeing people justifying the bombings as a legitimate response to any of a handful of grievances. Just in the examples above, we see complaints about poverty and global injustice, wasting valuable resources, and "draconian terror laws." That last one is perplexing. If not draconian, what should terror laws be? Permissive?

Readers can form their own opinions.

Companion post at The Jawa Report.