Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
It seems there is a theory that terrorists are spoiled brats who are trying to get the attention of elites by acting out. If the authorities don’t overreact, indeed if the reaction is dismissive, the intent of the attack is somehow thwarted.
Reminds me of a Dutch spokesman for the European Union describing the Islamist outrage at Beslan when over 300 were killed, nearly 200 children,as a “deep human tragedy”.I suspect this was part of a mindset shared by Swedes in general, although the recent progress of a Swedish anti-Islamist group- portrayed in the most negative terms in most quarters- suggests something of a backlash. Presumably that will grow further now.
Maybe what Bildt meant was that the bombers failed to cause mass casualties: According to several news reports, the suicide bomber injured no bystanders–presumably because only one of his six bombs detonated. And the car bomb would have been more devasting if the gas canisters had exploded at the same time.
Did the foreign minister use Twitter to convey this out of expediency? Or is it standard practice today to convey such weighty and grave matters of state in this way? So, much for protocol and the nobility of statecraft. Wouldn’t standing before the cameras and excoriating the perpetrators of this heinous act have been a more effective and proper way to convey the outrage of the Swedish people? Or am I just old fashioned?
We should count our blessings: had Bildt chosen to address the perpetrators and the public more directly, it probably would have been to apologize about “root causes” for fear of being Islamophobic.
I’m reminded of Terry Gilliam’s film, “Brazil” when the bomb explodes in the posh restaurant and while the bloodied and injured patrons writhe in pain in the background the characters in the foreground go about their business as though nothing had happened. Perhaps Gilliam’s dystopian world is being realized.
I see what he means, but I think it can be said to be ‘Failed” in the sense that it failed to get the ruling class to publicly recognize that Europe has a desperate problem with Muslims. It failed to wake the slumbering Swedes and stir them to action, or even to serious debate. It failed to make the European (or the American) media take more than cursory notice.
I guess the terrorists will just have to keep trying.
I love the libertarian folk at Reason, but I cringe when they cover this sort of story (as this did on this one) as more evidence of how ineffective terrorists are, and by implication how little we need to do about them.
Particularly silly is their claim that we should base our anti-terrorism policy based on your odds of being killed in a terrorist attack, always pulling out the “struck by lightning” comparisons, as if terrorist attacks were as random and meaningless as acts of weather.
Hmm, I’ll do a more in-depth post on this…
Particularly silly is their claim that we should base our anti-terrorism policy based on your odds of being killed in a terrorist attack, always pulling out the “struck by lightning” comparisons, as if terrorist attacks were as random and meaningless as acts of weather.
Hmm, I’ll do a more in-depth post on this… ·Dec 12 at 12:42pm
Reason and Michael Moore join forces for a bad idea. “They only got 3000, what’s the fuss.” This is a failed attack because they aimed for many, many more. They still managed to injure and scare people. The folks at Reason need to grow up and realize that people trying to kill us is a different matter than deaths by lightning or drowning. This nonsense is exactly why I dropped the magazine.
Why worry about Pearl Harbor? It was only a few battleships.
I’m often reminded of “Brazil”.
Especially the travel advertisement inviting folks to come “Relax in a panic-free atmosphere.”