.PAPER: US TELLS FORCES TO 'STAY OUT OF LONDON'
"XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX MON JULY 11, 2005 17:21:08 ET XXXXXThe news provoked fury from British MPs who pointed out that the UK had been America's staunchest ally in the wake of September 11.
PAPER: US TELLS FORCES TO 'STAY OUT OF LONDON'
American defense chiefs faced condemnation last night for banning U.S. airmen from entering London, the Uk's DAILY MAIL will report on Tueday.
All 12,000 members of the U.S. Air Force stationed in Britain have been told not to travel inside inner London because of the risk of further bomb attacks."
They said it handed a symbolic victory to the terrorists.
Even as news of the order emerged yesterday, President Bush was promising that America 'will not retreat in the face of terrorists', and voicing his solidarity with Londoners. Shortly after thebombings he declared in his weekly radio address: 'In this dark hour, the people of Great Britain can know that the American people stand with them.'
But yesterday U.S. officials were justifying the travel ban as a 'prudent' move. 'The security of our people is our main concern,' they said.
MPs said the spectacle of the world's most powerful armed forces being too scared to walk the streets of London was a symbolic victory for the terrorists.
The message that the city was unsafe for Americans would also have a devastating impact on the tourist industry, which relies heavily on the 3.6million U.S. visitors each year.
The order to U.S.A.F. personnel, who form the bulk of America's military presence in Britain, was issued on Friday. It applies whether they are on or off duty.
Even those with urgent business in the capital, such as visiting their embassy or the Ministry of Defence, must seek special permission.
Families and civilian staff at U.S. bases have also been 'strongly advised' to avoid London, and a number of theatre trips or sightseeing visits have been cancelled, the paper claims.
Developing..."Drudge
Sometimes I wonder about this administration? Are they fighting a war or running an elections campaign, or is there any difference between the two for them.
posted by madtom at 10:48 PM
3 Comments:
Mike C.,
Hello and welcome to my blog.
Really, I never thought of war as election politics, are you sure you want to stand by that statement?
How did Rove know, I don't know, maybe we should drag his ass into a deposition and ask him that under oath. From what I'm hearing, they are claiming that she really wasn't in the CIA, That she don't count as an undercover agent, and that Rove did not mention her by name, only as Wilson's wife... in other words, they are redefining what "is" is to the Nth degree.
Thanks Tom, it's a great blog; you sure are prolific!
"Really, I never thought of war as election politics, are you sure you want to stand by that statement?"
I meant from teh administration's point of view.
Well it's the subject matter, there's always more, there's always stuff that don't make the cut, and stuff so horrible that I have to take a step back and think before posting, just to catch my breath.
"Rove"
The funny thing is that it's only gotten worst, I listen to Rush, I love the show, I argue with it like a madman, but in the last couple of days I have been this close to just ripping the radio off the wall and smashing it on the ground...
Thanks for stopping by.
Post a Comment
<< Home