Government Sits Up and Takes Notice of Attacks on Business

Article excerpt

John w Gray (Letters, July 25) asks why, if the goal is change to the West's foreign policy, do the terrorists not attack military or government targets?

This is pretty straightforward ( they attack the public and infrastructure rather than the military or government, first, because it's an easier target, and second, because it is the public who vote on potential changes to governments and hence foreign policy ( not the military.

As for attacking infrastructure rather than strategic military targets ( the IRA discovered in the 80s that it is significant attacks on big business (City/Canary Wharf bombs etc) rather than attacks on military or people that make the government sit up and take notice.

The Government would never admit it, but whilst military lives are expendable, the economy has to be protected.

GRAHAM BAKER,

Pity poor Londoners who have to go to work under threat

PITY the poor Londoners who have to go to work by bus and tube after what has happened and with reports of more bombing to come.

Tony Blair has allowed thousands of illegal immigrants into this country. How many will be terrorists?

The political convert brigade who run our country has allowed fanatical clerics to preach hatred and violence.

What a state our country is in.

When is the hate going to stop?

JM METCALF,

Simplification of subject does nothing for cause of socialism

I AGREE with your correspondent Mr Gray in his criticism of Mr Fitzpatrick's analysis of the London bombing outrages.

No one will ever know what was in the mind of the suicide bombers, and Mr Fitzpatrick's simplification of a serious subject in order to fit his statement views does nothing for the cause of socialism.

Mr Gray is quite correct when he poses the question: "If the terrorist acts are meant to change our foreign policy then why bomb a bus?"

Why not attack government and military targets like the IRA tried to do?

D MITCHELL,

We are told to stay calm by the very person who is in the frame

THANKS Graham Baker, Newcastle (The Journal, July 20) for penning the opinion of many of us regarding the London tragedy.

It was inevitable that terrorism would have reached "our country" sooner or later, but may have been later, if attention had not been drawn to Britain, and we all know who is responsible for that, don't we? (First club Iraq)!

Now, as the result, the reprisals, like Iraq will fall on the innocent people, the emergency services and property.

Meanwhile we are told to "stay calm" by the very "person" who is in the frame for the present situations.

It was my thought straight away that "the duo" who started Iraq would never see the end to it, but a former police chief confirmed this in a TV interview, saying that these attacks could continue over 20 years.

We can only wish all the politicians concerned with Iraq and now here at home a long life in order that they may reflect, in depth, on all their mis-doings.

In conclusion, to offer greatest respect to all services who are having to work well beyond the call of their duty to cover for all the ill- thought out actions of some who should know better.

Also in all of our minds and thoughts are the relatives of victims of the London bombers, and we wish the survivors a speedy recovery.

ROBERT L LLOYD,

How can Mr Blair and Mr Bush be waging war on Islam?

ONCE again Mr Wild (July 25) and his "not in my name" brigade seem to have missed the point, has he not heard the true Islamic people who tell you that the extremists are not followers of the Islamic religion.

That being so, how can Mr Blair and Mr Bush be waging war against Islam? They are waging war against terror.

So come on Mr Wild what do you do, give us a way to stop this insanity. …