If they keep learning lessons, how come they keep scr**ing up?

On SKY I saw `Dear Leader' ramble on for a while about the various student visa'd tinkers roaming our countryside, and he actually managed to trot out 'lessons have been learned' for the ninety-nth time, again.

Maybe that is the theory, as those words, and the other tripe he came out with, blaming everyone but the sorry system he has presided over for over a decade (how the heck can you figure it's up to a geographically vast, leaky bordered 3rd world shambles to police who decides to leave their shores, versus what our happy campers in immigration decide to stick out the welcome mat to????) simply showed him up for the human loss of plot that he is.

Or....

Imran Khan: This is the result of a weak government and the 'war on terror'

This is the result of the existence nihilistic anarchists who do not value life, brook no argument to their... rather limited and generally unpopular... world view, who like to kill and have minority willing audiences for their sad, selfish, brain-dead, cowardly actions (ambushing civilians is not that skillful or 'audacious'*), mostly in some media and those they turn to for 'analysis' or 'comment' as it's good for ratings.

Take your pick.

Addendum-

*BBC - Who carried out the Lahore attack? - '...a similar number of men staged an equally audacious attack.'

Googled:

1. Fearlessly, often recklessly daring; bold. See Synonyms at adventurous, brave.
2. Unrestrained by convention or propriety; insolent.
3. Spirited and original

Not sure it's quite the collection I'd first go for.

Coverage favours the 'audacious'. Apparently.

Mumbai attacks leave India reeling

Enough, I think for any defence I may need that this entity I am forced to pay for no longer adequately represents my views and those I hold dear, along with our values.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com...y.com/ audacious

1. Fearlessly, often recklessly daring; bold. See Synonyms at adventurous, brave.
2. Unrestrained by convention or propriety; insolent.
3. Spirited and original:

Hard to equate any here with blowing up or shooting unexpecting, defenceless, innocent civilians in a sneak attack.

And if suicide is suggested as mitigation, I fear that being so tired of making life better that you fight only to end it all by seeking to take each others with you is simply nihilistic selfishness on top.

And darn fool can top 'emselves, and doing so in an undeclared manner with no concerns for self or collateral damage is really not that hard.

Though I suspect some £100k+ market rate talents closer to home could conspire to cock it up if tasked.

The BBC is not a plucky terrorist cheerleading team. Or, at least, should not be.

Complaint is in. See what template I get back in 6 weeks: 'On balance, we thing it struck about the right note'.

ADDENDUM -

Just saw Gordon Brown making the usual country rep. statement. But... did he really need to kick off by saying "I think I speak for the world...' The man is deranged.

Telegraph - Gordon Brown's dinner at the Taj Mahal in Mumbai

Gaurdian - What do the Mumbai attacks mean globally?

It's good to talk.G

There's no such thing as a bad idea. Despite being a cliche, there is much truth in that.

Time to talk to al-Qaida, senior police chief urges

So, at first blush, I have to say that, in principle, 'jaw-jaw' is better than 'war-war'. Not one of Winnie's best, but it is still memorable.

Anyhoo, before going on, here are definitions (if by no means definitive) of nihilism, anarchy and religious fundamentalism.

I'm just a tad intrigued as to how one talks with folk pretty much operating on these bases. There is also the small matter of getting to talk with them at all to... um, negotiate, being that to do so you'd need to meet up and to do that you'd need to know where they were. This might prove... tricky.

I for the life of me cannot see the parallel with the IRA. Bar the odd Bobby Sands individual, they had an agenda, however warped, from which compromise was at least a possibility, combined with a desire to reap the benefits of their beliefs whilst still on this planet.

And this is a guy up for head of the Met?

"Do the public seriously want amateurs playing in this world?" No. But then again some 'professionals' might also be less than optimal, too.

BBC - Britain 'could talk to al-Qaeda

BBBC - some worthy extra input prior to mine

BBBC - I added more:

It's probably possible to negotiate with those prepared to fight, even at cost of their lives, FOR something.

I remain unconvinced there is much chance of sensible dialogue with those simply seeking to kill, especially their own, in the cause of being AGAINST everything.

Guardian - Terror and truth

Leaving aside the question of how and with whom you negotiate (AQ being now a loose franchise, so I doubt that even if OBL went on Wossy's show and cancelled the whole killing spree deal, many of a 'self and/or as many others' destructing bent would suddenly turn their swords into plowshares), there are a few historical precedents to bear in mind.

It's probably possible to negotiate with those prepared to fight, even at cost of their lives, FOR something. From Japanese kamikaze pilots to Booby Sands.

But I remain unconvinced there is much chance of sensible dialogue with those simply seeking to kill, especially their own, in the cause of being AGAINST everything.

Though the prospect of Sir. Hugh chatting mano a mano with a learning disabled suicide bomber (his noble handlers being unavailable for comment, one suspects) might be interesting.