Angry in the Great White North

Dozens dead, hundreds injured, a city paralyzed. Criminals of the worst kind have struck and Canadians look to our leaders for comfort, and an acknowledgment that these people won't hurt others again.

Of course, the NDP has different priorities. While the terrorists are still at large, perhaps on their way to strike a the mass transit systems of major Canadian cities (Al Qaeda identified Canada as one of the Crusader countries that would be attacked), Jack Layton tells Canadians what he is most worried about:

Like all Canadians, I am repulsed by the violence we have witnessed today in London and express our deepest condolences to the families of the victims and to all those affected.

I join with Prime Minister Blair, Prime Minister Martin and the other G-8 leaders in strongly condemning these acts of terrorism. We will not allow it to undermine Canadian society, our institutions or our beliefs in democracy, human rights, tolerance, and equality. Indeed, we must go forward today with greater determination to build a world that embraces these ideals.

As evidence of that resolve, I urge the leaders gathered in Gleneagles to press on with their stated agenda to address global climate change and to meeting our commitments to fight global poverty. [emphasis added]

Once more, our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

Too bad he didn't mention hunting down and killing terrorists wherever they are hiding as part of the "resolve". Nope, a bunch of bureaucrat-enviromentalists burbling on about the ozone layer is what is going to show these terrorists we mean business. Oh, and more subsidized housing.

He's not much better than his British counterparts, in my opinion.

I can't believe this guy holds the balance of power in this country.

Major Update: This post has generated a lot of comment from supporters of Jack Layton and the NDP suggesting that I'm taking a cheap shot. I think my point is valid -- Jack Layton seems intent on ignoring the terrorists instead of defying them. But I realized last night that I did not give him credit for something he did not say.

The NDP platform is clearly against the war in Iraq. People like British Labour MP George Galloway have used the bombings as an excuse to rail against the invasion (now long since past) and to suggest that the attacks were a direct result of that action. The reasoning is that the British are to blame for what happened, not the terrorists.

Jack Layton could have scored points with his core constituency by making a similar point (either criticizing Britain's involvement in Iraq, or praising the NDP position against the invasion). He could have used the opportunity to criticize the American administration, again things that have been done by others like Galloway in the hours after the bombings. Such comments would be in line with NDP policy. Such comments would definitely have been cheered by many in the NDP caucus and by many NDP supporters. Such comments might even represent the personal opinion of Jack Layton, but I can't say for sure.

But regardless, he resisted the urge to do so. He might have even resisted the urgings of the people around him when he prepared the statement -- one can only imagine the debate that would have happened as they fashioned that press release. He should be given credit for doing so, and for not joining the ranks of those who could not.

I still think he could have added a comment about "calling on all freedom loving countries to resist terrorism and terrorists and to use all legal means to bring them to justice" or something along those lines. It would have worked for him and the NDP -- an acknowldgement that there are bad people out there who need to be taken out, but a subtle dig at American policy and Gitmo and so on.

[Update #2: Thanks to the Amazing Wonderdog and his readers for helping me clarify what was not my best written piece, and for giving me credit for doing so.]