AL QAEDA ATTACKS LONDON: how soon before the Left BLAMES BUSH?

FIRST: I want to extend my sympathies to all those people whose lives are horribly altered by these evil al Qaeda attacks in London today.

SECOND, I want to ask: How soon before the Left blames these evil attacks in London on Bush and the Iraq War? How soon before Leftists - (folks like George Galloway, Michael Moore, Chomsky, Dean, Durbin, Kennedy, Boxer, Pelosi, et al) - AND the neojihadist enemy - (folks like Zarqawi and Zawahiri and Bin Laden) - charge "IF Blair had not been "Bush's lap-dog" these attacks would NOT have happened!"

The Left has made this kind of charge before - and as recently as this week (when the new "global terror attack" figures for 2004 were revised UP this week). The Left makes this INSANE charge as if al Qaeda --- and their allied neojihadist groups in Russia, Chechnya, Bosnia, Turkey, Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt, Morocco, Spain, France, Germany, Scandinavia, Holland, Afghanistan, India, Kashmir, Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philipines, Mexico, and the US --- had not been attacking us ALL since 1993, and with an explicit manifesto/fatwa since 1998! Up until today, the Left has chosen TO IGNORE THESE FACTS; they are inconvenient to the Left's agenda, so they DENY, DENY, DENY; this denial is INSANE.

Bush and Iraq (and Blair's steadfast commitment to Bush and Iraq and the GWOT) are no more responsible for these evil attacks in London, than Bush is responsible for the 1993 WTC attack. (Or look at it this way: Bush and Blair are no more responsible for these attacks than a battered-wife is to blame for the attacks she receives at the hands of her vicious husband!)

Bush and Blair are no more responsible for today's attacks than they were for the beheadings in Thailand, OR the attack on Khobar Towers, OR on the USS COLE, OR on the two US African EMBASSIES, or on the MOSCOW THEATER, OR the BESLAN SCHOOL. Or on Ayodhya. Or in Turkey. Or in Kashmir. And so on. (These attacks either came BEFORE Bush was president - and BEFORE the Iraq War - or were against non-Christians in non-aligned nations which were opposed to the Iraq War. Or against other Muslims that al Qaeda fanatics don't like for sectarian reasons.)

It's long passed time the Left realized that the enemy is REAL, and REALLY EVIL, and that they have a PROACTIVE PLAN OF ATTACK, WHETHER WE COUNTER-ATTACK OR NOT. It's long passed time the Left accepted the fact that the Muslim fanatics have been waging an OFFENSIVE war - one we failed to adequately respond to BEFORE 9/11. And it's long passed time the Left accepted that we must wage a massive and probably decades long counter-offensive against these neojioahdists EVERYWHERE if we want to win. In other words: It's long passed time the Left joined us in the GWOT.

I expect the "anti-war" Left in the UK to do what their Spanish fellow-travellers -- (THIS IS NOT "RED-BAITING; THEY CALL THEMSELVES SOCIALISTS!) -- on the Left did after the ATOCHA attack: they blamed Bush. Which is why they're not really anti-war; they're on the other side.

I hope the Left proves me wrong - and FINALLY and UNAMBIGUOUSLY joins Bush and Blair in the GWOT, (and stops acting like The Fifth Column for the enemy!). I PRAY they do... but I do NOT expect it. WHY?! Because it would mean that the Left has to finally admit that their LEFTIST CREED is totally bankrupt, and this is too emotionally difficult for most people to do; (hence the cognitive dissonance and denial reaction-responses). Stay tuned...

UPDATE: THE LEFT RESPONDS - AS PREDICTED: GALLOWAY BLAMES BUSH! That was fast! (Hat-tip INSTAPUNDIT.) MORE "5th COLUMN/LEFTIST" REACTION OVER AT MICHELLE MALKIN.

UPDATE #2: More at MY PET JAWA, too.

UPDATE #3: Hitchens weighs in on the Left's idiotic anti-Bush/Blair/Iraq War response to today's bombings. (Hat-tip Michelle Malkin.)

UPDATE #4 - NORMBLOG has more examples of Leftists blaming Bush/Blair/Iraq War; he calls the post "CONTEMPTIBLE." Apt.

UPDATE #5: POWERLINE has another disgusting and INSANE example of illogical Leftist explanations for today's attacks , (and it once again reveals the Left's preference alterior/"occult"/hidden/conspiracy explanations over the simple facts).

UPDATE #6: Lorie Byrd at POLIPUNDIT links to a post by HUGH HEWITT citing Al Franken and Tom Oliphant blaming Bush.

UPDATE #7: I have never read a more angrrrrrry WRETCHARD over at The Belmont Club:

The Al Qaeda have characterized the attack on London as 'punishment' for Britain's temerity to resist the inevitability of Islam. It is the kind of punishment these self-ordained masters of the universe are accustomed to meting out against harem women and insolent slaves. A few administered licks, and no doubt the cowardly kuffar will crawl back to his place. The tragedy is that Al Qaeda's perception is perfectly correct when applied to the Left, for whom no position is too supine, no degradation too shameful to endure [UMPH added!]; but incorrect for the vast majority of humans, in whom the instinct for self-preservation has not yet been extinguished. It will result in history's greatest case of mistaken identity; the mismatch that should never have happened. The enemy is even now dying at our feet, where we should kick him and kick him again.

Right on!

UPDATE #8 [JULY 8]: Tariq Ali - writing in the left-wing UK GUARDIAN - blames Buhs, Blair and Zionism.

UPDATE #9: Josh Marshall of TPM - part of the "new mainstream of the democrat Party" (which puts him slightly to the Left of McGovern and Dukakis and Mondale and Kerry and Kennedy!) blames Bush and Iraq. (Hat-tip Hugh Hewitt.) Josh writes: "Certainly, it's no accident that the two acts of terror in Europe in the last three years happened in America's two main Iraq war allies... If anything our folly in Iraq has made the immediacy and intensity of this basic threat worse."

The Left always seems to forget - OR DENY - things like this: that 800 people have been murdered in Thailand in the last year - BY JIHADISTS; many of them were BEHEADED. These Thais victims were Buddhists who had nothing to do with Bush or Blair or Cheney or Rumsfeld or Zionism or Halliburton or Iraq. Neither did the BUDDHAS OF BAMIYAN - blown up in March of 2001, or the Nigerian women who have been stoned to death, and the Pakistani women who have been gang-raped as punshiment for violating sharia. Nor do the countless victims of Islamic honor killings all over the world have anything to do with Ashcroft or Gitmo or Abu Ghraib...

Bush is no more responsible for the Jihadists' attacks on the West than is the battered wife responsible for being battered by her battering husband.

There IS AN EVIL, THINKING, REAL ENEMY out there - Jihadism, and these Jihadists have a procative plan and a serious goal: to re-establish the Caliphate under fanatically extremist control, and to kill or convert anyone ands everyone who gets in their way - including fellow Muslims.

If we don't want them to win, then we must continue to fight them EVERYWHERE, using ALL the means at our disposal.

UPDATE #10: Here's a compendium of anti-American, unpatriotic/anti-patriotic ravings from the Left - ON JULY FOURTH. From LE SABOT MODERNE.

UPDATE #11 - 7/9: From Taranto's BOTW -

"... columnist Derrick Z. Jackson of the Boston Globe:

The world, of course, shares the sympathies of Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York, who said the London bombings were a ''despicable, cowardly act." Yet every invoking of the innocents also reminds us of our despicable, cowardly killing of innocent Iraqi civilians. . . .

The innocents in the so-called war on terror are always ''our" citizens or the citizens of our allies. The only innocent Iraqis are those killed by ''insurgents." Our soldiers clearly did not intend to kill innocents. But this posturing of America as the great innocent, when everyone knows we kill innocents ourselves, is likely only to make us look more like the devil in the eyes of a suicide bomber.

And here's someone with the unlikely name of Jann Wenner, on the Huffington Post:

If the London bombings are the work of an Al Qaeda offshoot, then you have to fairly say, in the same way we condemn other's [sic] terror, this is in part the result of Bush's War on Iraq.

To Jackson, there is no moral distinction between deliberately targeting civilians and accidentally killing civilians in a war of liberation. To Wenner, it is America's fault that terrorists deliberately target civilians. And note that the Times and Jackson both sneer at the "so-called war" on terrorism. This has been a brief tour of the mindset of some American liberals. Folks, Karl Rove is not making this stuff up."

UPDATE #12: Michelle Malkin reports: NPR's Daniel Snore, er, Schorr bloviated on air this morning that "Tony Blair has paid a heavy price for his support of his friend George Bush." "Heavy price:" PM Tony Blair's approval rating jumped from 32% to 49%.