At the moment I feel a little relieved that such a well organised attack wrought fewer casualties than I would have anticipated. I still live in fear that the British Government are playing the same game they played with the Tsunami- ie. deflecting attention away from the bottom line about numbers of dead. I also live in fear of the chance that beyond my immediate circle there may be some I care for involved- though at the moment I care for all those involved.

But, beyond that, is there anything to say? Certainly some are saying things- like Galloway, for instance. I think that asserting out role in Iraq or Afghanistan as the reason behind this outbreak of violence in our capital is utterly foolish. We all know that for the terrorists such things are a given 'grievance'- but they had many such grievances before those campaigns (and of course 9/11 came without any possible solicitation either from occupation of Iraq or Afghanistan- unless you consider Saddam's resolution-pressured Iraq directly linked to 9/11, that is), and the US withdrawal from Saudi was a classic example where giving them what they wanted was really neutral as far as violence toward the West is concerned- in fact violence climbed in the Kingdom subsequent to the US withdrawal. So there's no genuine coherence there, only politicking- which leaves Galloway behaving absolutely true to form.

Marc, however, at USS Neverdock, makes a legitimate point on behalf of all those people who might have lowered their guard as a result of the undermining of the notion of a War on Terror by some BBC journalism. 'The Power of Nightmares' assured us there was no real organised Islamic movement bent on our destruction, yet the massive organisation behind the London bombings- the syncronisation, the planning- suggest quite the opposite. It suggests the BBC's flagship programme of the last year, it's main publicised recent claim to excellence, was in fact highly flawed. And as forewarned is forearmed, the BBC has in this regard, and others less well-known, certainly been unconducive to the public good.

The Belmont Club says

'These coordinated attacks are, technically speaking, at far higher level of sophistication than the Madrid attacks of 3/11 which involved a single train. The attack on London was a "time on target" attack which required simultaneity so that one incident did not compromise the subsequent. By implication the personnel involved received some degree of training and planned the operation in sufficient secrecy to prevent British security services from getting wind of it.'

So the lesson is that we are still faced by a real danger, as real as war- and the nightmare can come to a town near us, or where we are.