London Underground Bombings

[Recchia]

I personally don't think mass transit is now gonna be unsafe and everyone's going to crazy to try and secure it. And, I don't think that it should be avoided simply because it can be attacked by terrorists. Anything can be attacked, including bridges and tunnels (and therefore CARS). Bomb the GW Bridge and I'll bet you'd get more fatalities than you would if you bombed a subway.

[M. Brown]

Like they have been saying on the news, everyone was so focused on airport security that they forgot about trains and subways. No doubt they have definately increased security on trains subways etc, but not as much as airport security.

[Spartan]

Oklahoma City doesn't have a subway system.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which is probably why they didn't bomb it.

I would get to the root of why people feel the need to lash out like this rather than just repsonding in kind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But we know why. I see no point in having that debate here though. What would you do after that? You have to react in some way. No reaction may be the most effective way, but the people wouldn't stand for that.

As for the trains and buses- what can you do? In these large cities, millions rely on the transit system to get around. Putting up metal detectors wont work on buses. There is nothing anyone can do about it, and that is the whole point of this.

I am glad that Londoners aren't spazzing quite like we did. I think Europe as a whole is more accustomed to the idea of terrorism.

People won't stop using the transit systems. The best bet would seem to be to have a good plan of action in the event of an emergency, and some spare sparts on hand.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

I am afraid we will continue to see small scale attacks like this (and this was small scale compared with 9/11) or far worse.  There is a significant element in the Muslim population that hates the tolerant, Christian west and the foolish politicians have let them immigrate the the US and Europe. The only real way to prevent future terrorism is either to deport these people or hope they change from within.

Riverside Gator, for a graduate of law school, you are not very good at choosing your words. You appear racist and sound like you support a ban on immigration of people that follow the religion of Islam. This is amazingly closeminded, I can't believe I am even refutating this statement on a web foroum about urban planning. I am not an attorney, but I don't claim to be one either.

[Charleston native]

I don't know why so many people have to lash out at RiversideGator, but I must come to his defense. The negative reactions from most of the people here demonstrate the sheer impulsive and irrational feelings that liberals have for conservatives.

Cotuit, you really need to lighten up a bit. Riverside by no means said that all of Islam is bad and needs to be eliminated, but he did make a great and obvious point: there is a significant number of extreme Muslim militants that wish to see the Western world destroyed to accomodate their desires for an oppressive Islamic theocracy. Do you punish all Muslims? Absolutely not, but because of the large number of the terrorists having Muslim ties, these people need to be investigated. Being a Christian and white, if there was a substantially-sized faction associated with Timothy McVeigh which started blowing up more places after OK City, I myself wouldn't mind being investigated. ESPECIALLY just for the fact that I have nothing to hide!! If Muslims in this country and in others are not terrorists and want to have a secure nation, they need to allow the government to do their work. If they have no terrorist ties, they have nothing to worry about.

Well, that got away from the subject, and I really don't want to make this a terrorism debate, but I had to respond to some of these responses. The knee-jerk reactions from someone's opinion clearly show more than a disagreement with conservatives.

[Cotuit]

Why do you feel the need to pit so-called liberals vs. so-called conservatives?

Black and white, the only way anyone in this country can think, and we call them fanatics.

[Charleston native]

Why do you feel the need to pit so-called liberals vs. so-called conservatives?

Black and white, the only way anyone in this country can think, and we call them fanatics. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good grief...you just demonstrated my point. It is usually liberals who like to think that everything is gray and there is no black and white. Moral relativism...what a wonderful thing. I'm not going to get into it any further because I just don't have the time.

[RiversideGator]

I see that, even though I declined to debate, everyone wanted to attempt to pile on Christians, conservatives, etc in general and me in particular (except for Charleston, thanks for that).

My point was that, since a significant portion of the Muslim populace seems to agree with these attacks (perhaps 20-30% based on polls) and terrorist attacks may become even more frequent and deadly in the future (especially if they have a nuke which they would use), it may be necessary to deport Muslims at some point in the future. Would you agree that this would be discussed if NYC went up in smoke?? I do not advocate this at this time. I think reasonable Muslims should step forward, denounce terrorism, and turn in the fanatics themselves and this would solve the problem. I do think it probably wise to not allow any further immigration of Muslims because of the terrorist threat. This seems to be an entirely sensible policy.

Riverside Gator, for a graduate of law school, you are not very good at choosing your words. You appear racist and sound like you support a ban on immigration of people that follow the religion of Islam.

Ahh, the dreaded R word rears its head. I fail to see how my statements are racist however considering that Muslims may be of any race. I have met Muslims who had blond hair and blue eyes, who were Arabs, who were black, who were Persian and who were Asian.

This is amazingly closeminded, I can't believe I am even refutating this statement on a web foroum about urban planning.

"refutating" is not a word. As for this forum, I would prefer to speak of urban planning (I think we can all agree on this). I never post the political threads, but I simply respond to things others say.

[Urban_Legend]

I'm not going to jump in a debate. But I will say this:

Urbanites, do not cease to ride and commute via mass transit, or else the terrorists win!

[vdogg]

I see that, even though I declined to debate, everyone wanted to attempt to pile on Christians, conservatives, etc in general and me in particular (except for Charleston, thanks for that). 

My point was that, since a significant portion of the Muslim populace seems to agree with these attacks (perhaps 20-30% based on polls) and terrorist attacks may become even more frequent and deadly in the future (especially if they have a nuke which they would use), it may be necessary to deport Muslims at some point in the future.  Would you agree that this would be discussed if NYC went up in smoke??  I do not advocate this at this time.  I think reasonable Muslims should step forward, denounce terrorism, and turn in the fanatics themselves and this would solve the problem.  I do think it probably wise to not allow any further immigration of Muslims because of the terrorist threat.  This seems to be an entirely sensible policy.

Ahh, the dreaded R word rears its head.  I fail to see how my statements are racist however considering that Muslims may be of any race.  I have met Muslims who had blond hair and blue eyes, who were Arabs, who were black, who were Persian and who were Asian. 

"refutating" is not a word.  As for this forum, I would prefer to speak of urban planning (I think we can all agree on this).  I never post the political threads, but I simply respond to things others say.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You are correct, your statements are not racist but they are indeed prejudice. It's just as prejudice as it would be if I said that all Christians should be deported or kept from entering the country. It is a very reactionary and ignorant view to have.

[RiversideGator]

You are correct, your statements are not racist but they are indeed prejudice. It's just as prejudice as it would be if I said that all Christians should be deported or kept from entering the country. It is a very reactionary and ignorant view to have.

Again, I did not advocate deportation. Read what I said. I also did not say all Muslims are bad people. Reading comprehension.

I do find disturbing the liberal dance with death however. We must love and accept those who are trying to kill us. We abort the young, euthanise the old. We are afraid to confront our enemies abroad and our criminals at home. This is why it has been referred to as the ideology of national suicide.

[Ruso]

But there is an obvious ilusion about the West being good, and the islam world "bad". We foget about the reason that might have provoked in them such a horrible, disgusting resentment. Riversidegator, you did blaim imigration though.

[RiversideGator]

Riversidegator, you did blaim imigration though.

Ruso: How do you think the terrorists get here or to Europe?? They immigrate.

For those of you who doubt what I say about the goals of the extremist Muslims, here is an article by one of their fellow (more moderate) Muslims: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-1684970,00.html

[Ruso]

Ruso:  How do you think the terrorists get here or to Europe??  They immigrate.

For those of you who doubt what I say about the goals of the extremist Muslims, here is an article by one of their fellow (more moderate) Muslims:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-1684970,00.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course- But what do u think the USA is made of ?-----Immigrants!!!

Zalam

[marcelo]

This is sooooo horrible. And people in Rio applauded and made fun of that, as they did when WTC came down!

[Ruso]

This is sooooo horrible. And people in Rio applauded and made fun of that, as they did when WTC came down!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, some people did the same over here, especially after 9-11, 2001. Also, actuals idiots who see the USA as "an evil empire".

[Spartan]

For those of you who doubt what I say about the goals of the extremist Muslims, here is an article by one of their fellow (more moderate) Muslims:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1072-1684970,00.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This article has one very key flaw. Islam also says that Jews and Christians are "people of the book" (dhimmi). This means that they are protected under God. They still believe in God, even though it is not the 'correct' way. A true Muslim would recognize that.

[Aessotariq]

Great point... All three religions are "Abrahamic" religions, and they all worship the same deity.

[Ruso]

Great point... All three religions are "Abrahamic" religions, and they all worship the same deity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

According to Islam( that is, early islam from mohammed), Christian and Jews ought to be respected. That is why they were allowed to live and progress in muslim cities----Jerusalem before the Crusades.

[RiversideGator]

Islam also says that Jews and Christians are "people of the book" (dhimmi). This means that they are protected under God.

While this may be the theory (although I have my doubts as to this), this is certainly not the practice. While I am no Islamic scholar, it appears that they believe that Mohamed superceded all previous prophets (i.e. Jesus) and that you have to follow Mohamed to reach paradise. Also, today, and in the past, non-Muslims are generally second class citizens at best in Muslim countries, if they are not actively killed. Look at the borders of Islam and notice how they all involve violent conflict. Non-Muslims receive nowhere close to the same treatment in Islamic countries as Muslims do in Western countries.

For more information on dhimmitude, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

[Ruso]

While this may be the theory (although I have my doubts as to this), this is certainly not the practice.  While I am no Islamic scholar, it appears that they believe that Mohamed superceded all previous prophets (i.e. Jesus) and that you have to follow Mohamed to reach paradise.  Also, today, and in the past, non-Muslims are generally second class citizens at best in Muslim countries, if they are not actively killed.  Look at the borders of Islam and notice how they all involve violent conflict.  Non-Muslims receive nowhere close to the same treatment in Islamic countries as Muslims do in Western countries.

For more information on dhimmitude, see  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

True, I agree, that toleration is currently nothing but words, in MOST muslim states. Remember, however, that most religions are now nothing but nice words. Now, I am sure it depends on the country, and in the way the manage the Sharia. Also remeber the division there is between sunni muslims and shiite muslims, and the doctrines they both have towards other, different religions. It is a shame, because historically, islam has had periods of absolute toleration, as in Spain, when the Moors ruled those lands.

[monsoon]

While this may be the theory (although I have my doubts as to this), this is certainly not the practice.  While I am no Islamic scholar, it appears that they believe that Mohamed superceded all previous prophets (i.e. Jesus) and that you have to follow Mohamed to reach paradise.  Also, today, and in the past, non-Muslims are generally second class citizens at best in Muslim countries, if they are not actively killed.  Look at the borders of Islam and notice how they all involve violent conflict.  Non-Muslims receive nowhere close to the same treatment in Islamic countries as Muslims do in Western countries.

For more information on dhimmitude, see  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmi

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I was in Japan, I saw a statue of a white Christian man holding a Cross towards the sky with a bunch of of dead Japanese at his feet that were obviously killed by a battle. The Christian Soldier's foot was on the chest of one of the dead Japanese people. This was in a very popular tourist location of Japanese history. Its all a matter of perspective of where you happen to live and how you were raised. Though I don't have any numbers to back this up, I would suspect that more people have died at the hands of promoting the various forms of Christianity, than any other religion on the planet.

[RiversideGator]

Though I don't have any numbers to back this up, I would suspect that more people have died at the hands of promoting the various forms of Christianity, than any other religion on the planet.

That is a pretty wild statement to be making without any substantiation whatsoever. I think it indicates a bias against Christianity. And, since when did Christianity become a white man's religion? It started in the Middle East and is actually growing fastest in Africa and Asia.

[Ruso]

That is a pretty wild statement to be making without any substantiation whatsoever.  I think it indicates a bias against Christianity.  And, since when did Christianity become a white man's religion?  It started in the Middle East and is actually growing fastest in Africa and Asia.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Isnt that sentence taken out of context? For what I read, it comes with a paragraph in which Christianity is compared in order to make people understand that every religion has its violent wing fanatics. +

[RiversideGator]

Ruso: When is the last time people were killed by bombings in the name of Christianity?