Yet, you do not deny it.

The British are on the ball because it's been nearly 3 years for them to get on the ball. 9/11 was the first of it's kind. You very simplistically post these threads that sound a lot like a regurgitation of Kerry/Edwards rhetoric in the hopes of... Hell, who knows why? I'm not sure what your point is other than to get back replies like mine. Then again, maybe that's really it.

>First of all, I never said I either agreed with or disagreed with the killing
>of this guy in London. I simply pointed out that they were doing something about
>it.
>
>Your the one who started this 'killing' discussion with "So, you believe killing others is directly associated with safety?" And here again in your last post you go back to it.
>
>You like to put words in people's mouths.
>
>
>
>>Again, you are equating killing with safety. You do realize that there are threats averted ongoingly that you do not hear about? Nobody killed. If they had been, I'm guessing you would have bashed the administration for killing needlessly. Based on other threads you have started.
>>
>>>I'm simply pointing out that the British are on the ball
>>>with this.
>>>
>>>Given 4 years, the Bush administration tells you to feel safer
>>>but has not results to back them up.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Funny... I thought the subject was whether I felt safer. So, you believe killing others is directly associated with safety?