On the news now. Multiple (8-9) explosions all over central London, on tube stations and buses. Lots of people dead and hurting... :(

*edit* link to story (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,161768,00.html)

Anka, and everyone else in the UK - I hope you and yours are safe, and if you're in London, please stay away from public transportation today. If there ever was a good day to shell out for cab fare home from work, today is it :/

(Are the mobile phone networks down btw? I've tried texting everyone I know in London and there's still a few I haven't heard back from. I'm hoping it's due to network overload and nothing more serious)

Anka, and everyone else in the UK - I hope you and yours are safe, and if you're in London, please stay away from public transportation today. If there ever was a good day to shell out for cab fare home from work, today is it :/

(Are the mobile phone networks down btw? I've tried texting everyone I know in London and there's still a few I haven't heard back from. I'm hoping it's due to network overload and nothing more serious)

I'm having the same problem. The mobile companies have given the emergency services the priorty on the networks which is fair enough but it sure sucks when your like me and can't get hold of your family and friends.

my sympathy and empathy to all of you having to deal with this. The not knowing is the worst. The aftermath is not pleasant either.

I hope all of our Londoners are safe.

Official death count at the moment is 33 I believe... but unofficially many more (they're probably having a hard time identifying bodies from the bus explosions, they looked very nasty).

It was inevitable, I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner, but still a huge shock for everyone over here.

I'm up North but got a few friends down there, thankfully all safe and well.

I'm so sorry. :( I hope you are all safe and your loved ones too.

I don't get to London much, thankfully.

Just when we were about to fight global warming, fight global poverty, and fight for the olympics, we've got Bush's legacy fighting us back.

News reports say Al-Qaida claiming responsibilty. Why am I not suprised?


As a side note, there were bomb sniffing dogs on my train today here in Chicago.

I don't get to London much, thankfully.

Just when we were about to fight global warming, fight global poverty, and fight for the olympics, we've got Bush's legacy fighting us back.

It boggles my mind that you would blame Bush, as much as I hate the man.

He, nor the US, blew anything up in London.

Someone like to play with numbers? I am going to start getting nervous on "funny dates".

9/11 (MM/DD) - US emergency number

11/3 (DD/MM) - European emergecy number is 112...

7/6/5 (DD/MM/YY) - Any ideas? Stay home for 8/7/6 :behindcom

Its Madrid all over again :mad:

Adversity strengthens resolve. Wanton acts of violence like this bring people and nations together. I have no doubt that Londoners will grit their teeth with determination and continue on.

My heartfelt condolences to all those affected by this act of brutality.

My thoughts and prayers are with everyone injured and the families and friends of all that were hurt or lost. If you are in that area please be safe.

First off, my condolences to everyone effected by this act of cowardice.

Second, blaming Bush was just silly. I know people think I'm a raving lunatic but not even I thought of trying to make that connection.

The reaction seems to be to spend much more money on the subways and transit systems. I am glad people responding are mostly saying they aren't going to quit living their lives. We have to go on with out lives. The problem, though, is since 9/11 our solution seems to be throwing money at increasing security at places already attacked. Sort of like closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. This, to me, isn't solving anything, it is making us spend money which we don't really have a lot of and it means we are one step behind the terrorists. They may be crazy, but they aren't stupid. We beef up security at a train station and they'll hit a tourist attraction. We beef up security at a tourist attraction and they'll blow up a power plant.

I also strongly believe that even if Britain didn't get involved in Afghanistan and Iraq they'd still be blown up. The reasons given are just an excuse.

A better solution must exist and I wish I could even begin to think of what it might be.

(Are the mobile phone networks down btw? I've tried texting everyone I know in London and there's still a few I haven't heard back from. I'm hoping it's due to network overload and nothing more serious)

No doubt it is. They have all sorts of emergency procedures that limit the use of the phones to emergency personel only. You and a million other people are trying to get though as well. I hope all your friends/family are ok though.

Second, blaming Bush was just silly. I know people think I'm a raving lunatic but not even I thought of trying to make that connection.

When we went to war in Iraq we fully accepted that there was a price to pay. The "War on Terrorism" was not only going to be fought by invading foreign countries but by terrorists attacking us at home, and the British public were prepared for that. Has Bush promised the US anything different?

My original point was that Britain is ready to move on and fight new challenges. Global warming and Africa really are important issues to us, of far more value than one middle eastern country. Bush's legacy is a continued political and military quagmire for us in Iraq, regardless of individual terrorist attacks.

I would suggest to you that of far greater and immediate danger to Europe, and the Westernized world as a whole, is the threat and spread of fundamentalist Islam.

But go ahead and worry about global warming and keep sending food to Africa that does nothing but further line the pockets of those in power there, meanwhile, as for the past 60 years, you may continue to rely on the US to defend the Western world (while still sending more food to Africa than anyone else ;))

Someone like to play with numbers? I am going to start getting nervous on "funny dates".

9/11 (MM/DD) - US emergency number

11/3 (DD/MM) - European emergecy number is 112...

7/6/5 (DD/MM/YY) - Any ideas? Stay home for 8/7/6 :behindcom

Its Madrid all over again :mad:

9/11/01 to 3/11/04 was 911 days (actually 912 - I think the terrorists forgot about leap year). First thing I thought of when I heard about this attack was "what combination of numbers will this work out to?"

I would suggest to you that of far greater and immediate danger to Europe, and the Westernized world as a whole, is the threat and spread of fundamentalist Islam.

But go ahead and worry about global warming and keep sending food to Africa that does nothing but further line the pockets of those in power there, meanwhile, as for the past 60 years, you may continue to rely on the US to defend the Western world (while still sending more food to Africa than anyone else )

I could argue at length against such paranoid, self-satified, selfish blather but it's just not worth it. Lets remember the 38 people who died today in London, lets remember the 50,000 people around the world today who'll die of poverty, and hope the G8 leaders can improve both our security and generosity at this ill fated summit.

You didn't seem very interested in remembering the fallen of London when you first placed the blame for their deaths on the United States, albeit vicariously. No, indeed, you seemed to care more about levying blame on the US, as per your norm.

If I'd said it was Blair's and Bush's legacy would it have satisfied your national pride? It makes no difference one way or the other to me.

The attacks really have punctured a public mood in Britain. It was pleasant to see our Prime Minister working on the highest global stage for optimistic causes we can all believe in, changing the stagnant agenda of the G8. The olympic games offered a bright future for our sportsmen. Our rag-tag musicians were rousing the nation to a cause. Now that mood has gone and instead of a bright future we're made to face our legacy of a middle eastern war, again. That is what I said earlier. If you couldn't understand it and took umbrage then I'm sorry but that's your problem.

It's all Bush's fault. Every global disaster is.

If I'd said it was Blair's and Bush's legacy would it have satisfied your national pride? It makes no difference one way or the other to me.

The attacks really have punctured a public mood in Britain. It was pleasant to see our Prime Minister working on the highest global stage for optimistic causes we can all believe in, changing the stagnant agenda of the G8. The olympic games offered a bright future for our sportsmen. Our rag-tag musicians were rousing the nation to a cause. Now that mood has gone and instead of a bright future we're made to face our legacy of a middle eastern war, again. That is what I said earlier. If you couldn't understand it and took umbrage then I'm sorry but that's your problem.

If you are going to speak of legacies, you'll need to go further back.

Take a gander at one of the Al-Queda training manuals you can find online. Their grievances begin with the fall of the Ottoman Empire in the aftermath of WWI and the occupation of the middle east by Britain and France.

It was inevitable, but not because of Iraq.

I seem to recall tales of Brits, during WWII, getting together and making noise, song, and merriment to let Hitler know they were not defeated.

Mourn your dead, celebrate their lives, and stand resolute.

I don't get to London much, thankfully.

Just when we were about to fight global warming, fight global poverty, and fight for the olympics, we've got Bush's legacy fighting us back.

And which American President was responsible for 911?

That is a retarded conclusion for the premise is retarded.

Here is logic:
Muslims blew up people on 911 unprovoked
or
They are provoked by things that will never change

Muslim terrorists blow up people unprovoked.


Your logic:
Muslims blow up people when they are provoked.
Bush attacked Muslims and provoked them.
Bush is responsible for provoking them to blow up London.
Bush only attacked Muslims when they blew up people.
Muslims blew up people(911) unprovoked.

Your premise is flawed every step of the way.

Like it or not, Muslim terrorists in our countries are going to be a real threat for some time in the future. Until we kill all the Muslim terrorists, that is. They were here long before Bush was even President. They were in England before Blair was PM.

We already know the price of NOT provoking Muslim terrorists. We got attacked. There is no harm in killing them all now.

Why not take this further back? If we are to believe what the Muslim terrorist say the true ultimate provocation of all Muslim terror is Israel. The state of Israel is pushed into the sea and, all Jews are wiped off the face of the earth their Jihad will continue. Sound familiar? It's Hitler in a head scarf. The question is: Do we choose to Appease until we are the next target? Or do we fight the idealogy of hate? Hilter wasn't defeated by groups of people joining hands together and singing Kumbia. He was defeated by American, British and, Russian steel.

We already know the price of NOT provoking Muslim terrorists. We got attacked.
Huh? US policy in the Middle East has been provoking terrorists for years. Their response was deplorable but it sure as hell wasn't unexpected.

My thoughts are with the familys and friends of the victims of yesterdays terrorizm act. I hope all boardmembers are save.


For all that claim politicans of your own or an other contry guilty, please don't.

The goal of terrorizm isn't to kill people, the goal is to destroy confidence in local goverment and in allys.
Please don't blame someone else than the terrorists.

It was a sad day.

Huh? US policy in the Middle East has been provoking terrorists for years. Their response was deplorable but it sure as hell wasn't unexpected.

I said that.

We support Israel.

We have for close to 60 years.

That is history. They want history changed.

We can't change that.

They want Israel gone.

We help prevent that. That is now.

That is also the future, for you, your grandchildren, and their grand children.

Your statement is facile. For it implies that you have no understanding of that. Or it implies that you support the removal of Israel; which unless you are a skinhead jew hater, I seriously doubt. Which leads me to the conclusion to the first implication-that people who say what you said have no fricken clue as to what the hell they are talking about.

So we have an immutable situation in regards to the cause of their discontent. As I said, provoked by two things that will never change-history of support for Israel, or continued support for Israel.

If your very existence is provocation for your opponent. If support for Israel's very existence is provocation. You really are going to have to come to the fish or cut bait conclusion.

That Muslim terrorists will always hate you. I really can't see any other logical conclusion to that situation. They will always be provoked. No specific act now or in the future can provoke them(have you ever tried to fill up your gas tank after it was already full, did not work did it?)

So, So, logically then, if they are ALWAYS provoked already. Are you following me? Then NOTHING else that you do is the cause of their further provocation.

Which then still logically dismisses Anka's premise.

If the cause of 911 and today and Madrid was something that happened in 1948(which we can't change), then ....have I made my point yet, or have I lost you...?

If what we did to provoke them happened in 1948(the founding of Israel as a soveriegn state) we can not change it if we wanted to. And it will be their provocation and rationalization until the end of time, or until Israel ceases to exist. Which is probably going to be about the same thing, in any regard.



So then, where does that lead us. Muslim terrorists will always hate us. There is nothing that any president living or dead that could prevent provoking them already. They will always hate you. They will always want to kill you. Unless you convince them that their provocation is unreasonable. But then that implies that they are reasonable.

Do you think that they are reasonable? Do you really think that you can talk them into being nice? Do you think that ANY of them are going to concede Israel to us?

You really think that Islamic terrorists are going to wake up one day and say "You know, I really think I was wrong about the Jews and the US. They really aren't so bad after all. I think I better spend the rest of my life convincing my terrorist buddies that they too were wrong all these years". Because that really is the only solution you offer, when you say something like you just did.

There were 100+ martyrs born today who will grow up and try and kill your daughter. Who will want to kill your son and your neighbor's son because of something that happened in 1948.

When we find out who carried out these attacks I fully expect that some native British muslims participated. These are not people who fumed at the perceived evils of capitalism every day for the last twenty years when at school, when going shopping, when going to work. These are likely to be British people recruited after the allied invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. We knew in advance that this would happen before we invaded and this is part of the price we accepted we would pay.

When you look at the familes of the Britains detained in Guantanamo bay you don't see religious fanatics but regular British muslim familes. These people were not born evil or bred evil. Richard Reed, the shoe bomber, is another British Al Qaeda terrorist who came from a comparitively normal family background. When you talk in blinkered language about "they will always hate us" you show little understanding of terrorism, terrorists, or any conflict for that matter.

My thoughts go out to all the victims of this latest act of terrorism in London.

A despicable action that is the fault of Islamic terrorists and no one else.

Amazing that it was not even worse, remember after all that their goal for 9/11 was to kill 30,000 people and not the 3,000 they did.

Btw - there is a major run on UK flags of all sizes here in the Milwaukee area as people (including myself) want to fly the Union Jack in support.

we've got Bush's legacy fighting us back.

Others have commented on this sentiment but I wanted to make a point or two on your comment. First, UBL has been attacking the US from the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, to blowing a hole in a frigate, to two failed attempts on the trade towers. These attacks have spanned from Reagan to Bush Two-Term.

The phrase "Bush's legacy" pins responsibility on a president that is trying to actively do something. As a matter of fact, these terrorists are attacking the innocent and not the military. This seems to be like telling a battered woman that she brought the beatings on herself.

I understand that good people doing nothing is easy. It is much harder to engage very dangerous people and confront them on their abuses to others.

World poverty, dictatorial governments and war are all related. The world has a sad colonial and cold war legacy where the local populace was kept impoverished while resources were taken for others use.

The best way to solve world poverty is not to simply feed people. The best way to solve world poverty is to push these governments toward democracy and find a way to employ these people.

The choice is whether to feed someone or to feed someone's self respect through employment.

Your statement is facile. For it implies that you have no understanding of that.
Your belief that our support for Israel is the only thing we've done that has provoked terrorists implies you have no understanding of history.

Inter-racial and inter-religious conflicts have been around a long time. Consider the Muslim use of the word 'crusader' when referring to Westerners. This refers to historical grievances starting from about 1000 years ago. Similar historical issues relate to Muslim incursions in the Balkans and Spain, also dating back over half a millenia.

Terror attacks in London are rooted in a lot of history, not just recent events in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Your belief that our support for Israel is the only thing we've done that has provoked terrorists implies you have no understanding of history.

You are correct, but not in the manner you think you are correct. The main provocation is simply that we are the West. We stand for things they view as abhorrant, i.e. governments not run by Imams and Ayatollahs.

Do not try to blame modern terrorism on support of the Shah. The Shah hasn't held power in 25 years. Don't try to blame it on our presence in Saudi Arabia, we were asked to be there. It isn't because we legitimized Arab dictatorship, because when we overthrew Saddam, they still waged their war instead of celebration. They hate the West and everything the West stands for.

Their goal is simple. The destruction of Israel and the violent Islamic overthrow of as many national governments as possible. It is because the West stands against that that we are targets.

"Understanding their complaints" will not stop them. "Civil discourse" will not assuage them. Even rendering aid unto them in the face of foreign hostility, as in Afghanistan, simply gave them a stronger base from which to attack us.

Terror attacks in London are rooted in a lot of history, not just recent events in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The terror attack in Madrid was clearly rooted in recent events in Iraq and the attack in London appears to be the direct successor. The middle eastern terrorists had no clear grievance with the Spanish prior to the invasion of Iraq and that was a clear motivation to the Madrid bombers. I hope the "War on Terror", whatever direction it's taking now, will find more successes before any other allied countries, such as Denmark and Italy, suffer the threatened attacks, or indeed before there is another attack within the US.

Their goal is simple. The destruction of Israel and the violent Islamic overthrow of as many national governments as possible. It is because the West stands against that that we are targets.

From my perspective, you seem to be confusing their goals with their methods.

I know you have very deep held opinions in this area and there isn't a need to repeat the old arguments again. We can agree to disagree.

Your belief that our support for Israel is the only thing we've done that has provoked terrorists implies you have no understanding of history.

I have a firm grasp of history. And understand it.


Read UBL's words as to why he blew up the WTC. Read them. I can find them for you.

Of course his grievance is slightly different than those who blew up London. But really, does that make any difference?

Because the conclusion is still the same.

If someone wants to kill me for being And nothing I can do can change their mind. And if they are intent on killing me because I be. There is no appeasement. And they have the means. There is only one recourse that is logically left for me.

See, I do not abide by your typical liberal Cultural Relativism. Now you can form your own conclusions as to what that means.

If terrorists were wanting to terrorize Westernized people just because they're infidels, they'd be doing it in Canada and New Zealand and lots of other places.

From my perspective, you seem to be confusing their goals with their methods

Why do you have that perspective?

They want Israel to not exist. They want all Jews(and other Westerners) off of their land.

Those are their demands.

What perspective are **** are you talking about?

They really are trying very hard to make their demands, their goals happen.

What perspective.???????

If terrorists were wanting to terrorize Westernized people just because they're infidels, they'd be doing it in Canada and New Zealand and lots of other places.

Exactly.

The US helps keep Isreal existing. Those countries really do not do that.


But I am quite sure that when they take care of the Jew situation in Palestine.

That other infidels are next on their list, I assure you. The Jews are just at the top of it.

Wouldn't you agree that US deserves some blame for arming and training Osama Bin Ladin during the 80's?

Do not try to blame modern terrorism on support of the Shah. The Shah hasn't held power in 25 years.
So what? Do you think 25 years is enough to make people forget?

Don't try to blame it on our presence in Saudi Arabia, we were asked to be there.
Whether we were asked or not is irrelevant. It still pissed off a lot of people.

Wouldn't you agree that US deserves some blame for arming and training Osama Bin Ladin during the 80's?

What blame. The Soviet Union invaded Afganistan. Which was a generally all around bad thing. Helping an enemy of your enemy is not unheard of in history. Your failure in realizing that shows who has the problem with history.

So what? Do you think 25 years is enough to make people forget?
It only takes 3 years or so for Americans to forget stuff.


Whether we were asked or not is irrelevant. It still pissed off a lot of people.
They are going to have to get over that, then aren't they.

See, I do not abide by your typical liberal Cultural Relativism.
I don't abide by your typical right-wing, war-mongering, cultural supremacy.

Helping an enemy of your enemy is not unheard of in history. Your failure in realizing that shows who has the problem with history.
Nor is taking responsibility for the short-sightedness of that policy when it comes back to bite you in the ass. Your failure in realizing that shows who has the problem with reality.

From my perspective, you seem to be confusing their goals with their methods.

I know you have very deep held opinions in this area and there isn't a need to repeat the old arguments again. We can agree to disagree.

Let me suggest, again, go read one of the al-qaida manuals which can be found on the net.

If terrorists were wanting to terrorize Westernized people just because they're infidels, they'd be doing it in Canada and New Zealand and lots of other places.

Both New Zealand and Canada sent troops to Afghanistan.

They choose targets based on prominence and other criteria.

Nor is taking responsibility for the short-sightedness of that policy when it comes back to bite you in the ass. Your failure in realizing that shows who has the problem with reality.

You really did not say that, right?

Your grasp of human history and behavior offers me no insight.

Wouldn't you agree that US deserves some blame for arming and training Osama Bin Ladin during the 80's?

...so, by your logic, because we came to Bin Laden's aid during the 80's and helped him, we're at fault because he now shows no gratitude and seeks to destroy us.


So what? Do you think 25 years is enough to make people forget?

25 years ago, during the Shah's rule, there was no terrorism against us demanding his overthrow. That isn't their reason.


Whether we were asked or not is irrelevant. It still pissed off a lot of people.

If we had let Hussein take Saudi Arabia, they would have cried that we stood by and did nothing, and that was why they were trying to blow our citizens up.

I don't abide by your typical right-wing, war-mongering, cultural supremacy.


And we just had a thread where you guys were saying that everyone fits into your little boxes and in your seating arrangements oh so well.

There is nothing about my war mongering that is typical, nor what I support that you might think of as right wing, nor cultural supremacy.

If you were worthy the time, which you are not, I could show you exacly how stupid Cultural Relativism is.

But there is pleasure in ignorance, I will let you continue pleasing yourself.

Your grasp of human history and behavior offers me no incite.
I think I've been doing a commendable job of inciting you.

I don't abide by your typical right-wing, war-mongering, cultural supremacy.

Don't worry Klath. The fundamentalist Muslims don't believe in culteral relativism either. While you try to convince them that all cultures are equal and deserving of consideration, they will brand you an infidel and if you are lucky, you will get to live as a second class citizen in their lands. More likely, however, you will be killed.

...so, by your logic, because we came to Bin Laden's aid during the 80's and helped him, we're at fault because he now shows no gratitude and seeks to destroy us.
No, by my logic, we should have considered the consequences of arming OBL. It's not like we were unaware of his politics at the time.

Don't worry Klath. The fundamentalist Muslims don't believe in culteral relativism either. While you try to convince them that all cultures are equal and deserving of consideration, they will brand you an infidel and if you are lucky, you will get to live as a second class citizen in their lands. More likely, however, you will be killed.
I made that comment solely as a response to Fyyr's accusation that I was a "typical liberal Cultural Relativist." I'm not. However, he seems intent on insulting me so I've been taking his insults and tossing them back almost word for word.

I'm not pro-terrorist. I think they're a bunch of evil ****s and if OBL was here now I'd bust a cap in his ass and not lose any sleep over it. However, I do believe that US policy has contributed to making terrorism a bigger problem than it might have been if we'd been a little less short-sighted.

ittle less short-sighted.

You are in effect saying that we should have let, unabated, the USSR expand into Afghanistan.

You really are saying that we should not have helped them expel the USSR.

Are you saying that was short sighted?

I mean REALLY, was that short sighted?

You are saying that was a bad thing.



ok, I just figured you out, you don't really believe that. Just trying to incite me....

You got me.

With my mouth open.

I made that comment solely as a response to Fyyr's accusation that I was a "typical liberal Cultural Relativist."

I made no accusation.

But if it is a label that you are accustomed to wearing, or are a Cultural Relativist,,,I can see how you might have thought it such.


I just reread that post...
It was meant in the form such as...

"your typical run of the mill blah blah,,," The 'your' did not mean to denote YOUR personal proper. Turn of idiom, that did not come across correctly.

You really are saying that we should not have helped them expel the USSR.

Are you saying that was short sighted?

I mean REALLY, was that short sighted?

You are saying that was a bad thing.
I'm not sure what would have happened in the long term if we had done nothing -- that's an interesting question but it wasn't what I was suggesting.

In any case, I think you're oversimplifying the options available to us at the time. During the Carter and Reagan administrations we were pumping something like half a billion dollars a year into Afghanistan. I think we could have used the influence that gave us to make sure someone with a favorable view of westerners was calling the shots when things were over.

we should just wipe out all arabs and muslims, problem solved. i mean seriously, screw global warming and poverty... its not as important as wiping an entire race out because they believe they are right and we aren't, and because some of their people did some horrible acts (but np we can get em back with worse stuff!). In 100 years, if we ever reincarnate or something, we'll be thanking our former selves for eliminating such a pest while we hide underground in caves because of the intense heat and go around looking for food in a post-apocalyptic landscape.

Oh yea [/sarcasm]!

I don't know what you think went on in Spain but, here is what I think went on there. The terrorist pushed and Spain yielded. Thus rewarding the terrorists and, encouraging them to try again.

The next place they decided to strike was London. They want you to yield to their will too but, yielding to their will only encourages them to strike again and again. The solution is not to cut and run but, to stand firm. Anything else justifies their actions.

we should just wipe out all arabs and muslims, problem solved.

That is going to far.




We need to wipe out all arabs and muslims who want to kill us and destroy Israel. That is not sarcasm.

I am sorry that that runs counter to what you were brainwashed in school.

It is just plain and simple logic.

If someone is being unreasonable.
If someone is willing to kill themselves to kill you.
The only way they will stop trying to kill you is when they or you are dead.
There is only one conclusion.
Start stacking up the martyrs. They want to go to nirvana(or whatever the hell their heaven is) anyhow. What is ethically wrong with giving them a first class ticket, right now?
They are willing to, and going to die anyway. There is no moral problem with helping them out.

None of your Dovy PeaceNik Flower Power Hippy Dippy solutions have ever worked when dealing with these people. You can't talk to them and pass them a bong and expect them to like you. They are definitionally unreasonable. Their demands are unreasonable. Their goals are unreasonable. Their methods are unreasonalbe. And unless you concede Israel, you will never seem reasonable to them either.

But Americans are pussies. Some of them actually DO care what a bunch of incidental effete French farts think about them. And will never do what needs to be done. So using, again, the liberal circular hind sight 20 20 logic. When the next bomb blows up in Arizona or SF or Ottawa, or where ever, 2 years from now...It really will be our fault. For not doing anything about it now.

This motivation to empathize and apologize with your enemy is absurd. Your enemy hates you. They want to kill you. Right now. And you want to toss their salads. Gimme a break.

Well the terrorists have one won victory on this messageboard.

Instead of talking about US inactivity on global warming or welcoming action to help world poverty we're arguing about the middle east, again. They want to set the agenda, even if EQ messageboards wasn't what they had in mind.

They want you to yield to their will too but, yielding to their will only encourages them to strike again and again. The solution is not to cut and run but, to stand firm.

Don't worry. We knew a major terrorist attack was inevitable. (Yes that is the official word used by government and police, inevitable). We bought into that when we signed up for the invasion and it's surprising the security services fended it off as long as they did. I severely doubt that UK forces will be removed from Iraq because of this, we stuck it through Irish terorrism for decades.

The Spanish never wanted to have anything to do with Iraq in the first place, with something like 90% of the population against the war when it started. You can't blame them for getting rid of the Prime Minister who put them on the front line.

This motivation to empathize and apologize with your enemy is absurd. Your enemy hates you. They want to kill you. Right now. And you want to toss their salads. Gimme a break.
Wanting to understand your enemy isn't the same thing as empathizing with them or apologizing for them.

What part of..

"We will keep blowing you up until there are no Jews in Israel"



...does not make sense you?

It is not like it is a big secret or anything. They have been telling me that my whole life. I understand them already. What I don't understand is why doesn't everybody else.

They tell you what they want. It is NO SECRET.

Why don't you get it?

All my life....

Hijack Plane
"Jews get out"
Blow up Olympians
"All Jews die"
Take Hostages
"Israel go away"
Blow up barracks
"Jews die"
Blow up Jews
"Jews, please die"
Blow up boat
"Jews please die"
Blow up WTC
"Well we have been telling you this whole time, but you did not listen. We really did mean it before when we told you Jews die and Americans get out of M East"

It is NO SECRET. There is no need to 'understand' them. This is not some Phil Donahue Freudian Mysteria. They don't want to kill Jews because their fathers were absent and their mothers were overbearing.

Like Chris Rock says "What eva happ'ned to Craazzeee!"

Well the terrorists have one won victory on this messageboard.

Instead of talking about US inactivity on global warming or welcoming action to help world poverty we're arguing about the middle east, again. They want to set the agenda, even if EQ messageboards wasn't what they had in mind.

For some of the world, the agenda has been focused on them for some decades. Not that Europe has given a flying **** about terrorism in Israel.

Is global warming an important issue? Yes. Is it more important than the fact that Western society is embroiled in a war with those who have no other interest than our destruction? No.

Is world poverty important? Yes, sure. Do you think the poverty stricen nations of the world will be better off when their mullahs and imams are staying fat and healthy whilst pronouncing their sentances of death or gang rape against another starving villager? Do you think handing more money to African nations will help their starving? It won't. The food and money provided never reaches those who need it.

Deplore, all you want, Western society as the great evil of 20th century, as is popular to do amongst the liberal quasi-intellectual elite, that won't change the fact that Nigeria, once the Jewel of Africa within our lifetimes, is now a muslim nation where its people live in poverty and fear. It won't change the fact that in the Sudan, the Arab world was arriving en masse to join in the rape and slaughter of their non-muslim minority.

Nations which reject Westernization fail. Vietnam. North Korea. Syria. Lebanon (once Syria overthrew its westernized government). Most of Africa.

Those nations which embraced Western views have flourished. Singapore. Japan. South Korea. Israel. India.

Do you want to help world poverty? Stop giving cultures which have haven't advanced in half a millenia equal hearing.

Not all cultures are equal.

Can you imagine OBL with this liberal psychobabble?

I am laughing my ass off.

He's pissed off in a hole right now because all you hippies want to just understand him.

And he's like all frustrated
"What, are you fn retarded"
"I even wrote you all a letter."
"I just told you that Jews must die and get out of Israel"
"What, you think Im lying"


It is not really the war mongers and hawks that piss him off. He's a warrior, he loves war. What is pissing him off, really, is all you yellow liberals who won't even listen to what he is saying.

It is not like it is a big secret or anything. They have been telling me that my whole life. I understand them already. What I don't understand is why doesn't everybody else.
I don't know -- perhaps everyone else has a more sophisticated world view than you do?

Typical liberal arrogance.

I just don't understand why you think that just because you think you are so smart that you think that when THEY tell you exactly what they want, that YOU know better than they do.

Scene:
Psychobabble Liberal seated with pen, clipboard, and tape recorder.
Long haired, lice infested, smelly terrorist on couch.

Liberal "So tell me what motivates you"
Terrorist "I want all Jews to die, and Americans out of Middle East"
Liberal "I got all these diplomas on the wall, and they say that you really don't mean that"
Terrorist "Well, um ya. I really do"
Liberal "No one can hate Jews"
Liberal "We made sure of that with our Cultural Relativist Revolution post WW2"
Liberal "You can't hate Jews and want them to die just because they are Jews, that would make you a NAZI"
Liberal "You don't want to be a NAZI do you?"
Terrorist "Of course not, I am a terrorist, not a NAZI"
Liberal "See there you have it. Reasonable, isn't it?"
Liberal "Tell me about your childhood"
Terrorist "I wanted to kill Jews since I was a small boy"
Liberal "You don't really mean that"
Terrorist "What was your name again?"
Liberal "It does not end in a 'man or 'witz, so you really don't want to kill me"
Terrorist "Are you Christain, then"
Liberal "Not really, I am an atheist"
Terrorist "Well, that's what I thought, DIE HERETIC SCUM!"
Boom!

Typical liberal arrogance.

I just don't understand why you think that just because you think you are so smart that you think that when THEY tell you exactly what they want, that YOU know better than they do.
You're being obtuse. I'm not suggesting sitting them down on a psychiatrists couch, I'm suggesting understanding the geopolitical events that gave rise to the terrorist movement that now threatens the world.

Typical liberal arrogance.

You and Aidon have been ranting for pages and pages now with overblown arguments and assertions and you dare call everyone else arrogant. Just look back at the pages and pages of the stuff, full of paranoia, abusing and insulting almost the whole world with a hate filled frenzy. Get a grip!

As far as I can see your the one that derailed this topic. With your hate filled off the cuff remark about Bush being responsible for the terrorist attack. You didn't even wait a day until your comments devolved into cynical partisanship. At the expense of a thread that was started to show empathy and sympathy for the true victims of this terrible attack in London.

You're being obtuse. I'm not suggesting sitting them down on a psychiatrists couch, I'm suggesting understanding the geopolitical events that gave rise to the terrorist movement that now threatens the world.

The geo-political events that gave rise to the movements are complex and date back to WWI and the Anglo-French dealings with both the Jews and the Arabs during that period up to the founding of the State of Israel. I fully understand the history which lead up to modern terror organizations.

Do you?

In the end, understanding the reason doesn't change matters. The only possible solution is the eradication of Israel and that isn't possible, even if America lost its mind and decided that was acceptable, because Israel will turn every Arab capital into glass before it lets itself be destroyed.

You and Aidon have been ranting for pages and pages now with overblown arguments and assertions and you dare call everyone else arrogant. Just look back at the pages and pages of the stuff, full of paranoia, abusing and insulting almost the whole world with a hate filled frenzy. Get a grip!

Paranoia? Paranoia for you is simple fact for me.

If I go to an Islamic nation, especially an Arab one, I'd best spend my entire time at the US embassy, because if its found out I'm a Jew, odds are pretty high I won't make it back.

These people want my people dead and destroyed. Don't ask me to understand their view point. I understand all I need to understand.

At the best of times, Jews in Muslim nations were honored enough to be allowed to be second class citizens, because while we were the sons of pigs and dogs (so it says in the Quran), we were at least People of the Book, so we shouldn't be destroyed outright. We just weren't allowed out in the rain, lest our filth run off onto a good Muslim man.

And when they are done with my people...they will move on to your people.

As far as I can see your the one that derailed this topic. With your hate filled off the cuff remark about Bush being responsible for the terrorist attack

My original post was filled with disappointment, not hatred, and I've explained it before without anyone taking time to understand so I won't do it again.

Bush may be a nonce, but he's no terrorist.

The irony is, I've seen people saying just that (and I agree) but then following up by saying that Muslims are. Muslims are not terrorists. Most of the British ones condemn what happened here and in the US on 9/11 as much as anyone else does... terrorists are terrorists, most if not all of them happen to call themselves Muslims, but that doesn't work both ways.

But everyone getting all wound up and bickering at each other is exactly what those guys want - chaos, fear, unfounded accusations etc... the best thing we can do is unite against them, not bicker with each other.

The geo-political events that gave rise to the movements are complex and date back to WWI and the Anglo-French dealings with both the Jews and the Arabs during that period up to the founding of the State of Israel. I fully understand the history which lead up to modern terror organizations.
If you fully understand the history then you can see how US foreign policy in the Middle East contributed to the growth of modern terrorism. If you can't see this then I don't believe your claim that you understand the history.

In the end, understanding the reason doesn't change matters.
It can't change what has happened but it can change what happens next. If it helps us to evaluate our future foreign policy decisions and consider their consequences then it's worth the effort.

If you fully understand the history then you can see how US foreign policy in the Middle East contributed to the growth of modern terrorism. If you can't see this then I don't believe your claim that you understand the history.

Yes, the US supported Israel. The Arabs lost conventional wars. Modern terrorism was born. That actually is pretty simple.


It can't change what has happened but it can change what happens next. If it helps us to evaluate our future foreign policy decisions and consider their consequences then it's worth the effort.

In the end, you speak of a group of nations which are all run by nasty dictatorial types, inhabited by a group of people who are seemingly incapable of ruling themselves. The terrorists claim to get mad at us because these Arab nations are run by dictators (though its not our fault and for most of their existance, the US didn't support the various autocratic regimes). When we overthrow one of these dictators and help install a democratic government, the terrorists claim they are mad at us for overthrowing an Arab and muslim.

They claim to be mad at us for having troops in Saudi Arabia. Yet they didn't complain about us being in Saudi Arabia until after we'd beaten Iraq in the first Gulf War.

The only constant in their complaint is Israel and Jews. Zionists. They hate the US because the US supports Israel and doesn't persecute Jews. That's it. That's the sole reason.

Are you suggesting the US should stop supporting Israel?

If I go to an Islamic nation, especially an Arab one, I'd best spend my entire time at the US embassy, because if its found out I'm a Jew, odds are pretty high I won't make it back.

And now, with your absolute stance and attitude, you're contributing to taking large steps towards the same being true for Muslims going to western countries. You're a part of making sure that western nations take on some of the less charming aspects of middle-eastern culture.

Good going! *golfclap*

Actually Tinsi, if you read my various posts in the past, I'm usually the first person defending the liberties of Arab-Americans when those liberties are abused in the US.

Actually Tinsi, if you read my various posts in the past, I'm usually the first person defending the liberties of Arab-Americans when those liberties are abused in the US.

It'd be sad then, if someone read your posts here and decided to agree with them, yet not to worry too much about the stand you've held in others, wouldn't you say?

I should only hope to be so persuasive in my arguments. If I am, I'm in the wrong line of work and do you know a good news outlet who wants a op ed writer? ;)

That aside, nowhere in my posts have I advocated a reduction in the civil liberties of the various Western nations. But I'll not bow to political correctness and put forth some unrealistic and, indeed, dangerous view that we should try to reason with the rise of fundamentalist Islam. It has set itself up against us, for whatever reasons you may wish to believe, and now must be fought.

I don't think anyone here is being that persuasive to anyone. We all spout off our opinions but, obviously there is little change.

But I'll not bow to political correctness and put forth some unrealistic and, indeed, dangerous view that we should try to reason with the rise of fundamentalist Islam.
It's not political correctness to believe that if you antagonize moderate Muslims long enough you'll lose them as your allies in the fight against terrorism. The terrorists and those advocating violence are a minority and whatever methods we use to fight terrorism, they need to take that into account.

Terrorists are a cheap and abundant weapon. You can kill them by the dozen but if you don't address the reasons that lead to them becoming terrorists then there will be plenty more to take their place.

But I'll not bow to political correctness and put forth some unrealistic and, indeed, dangerous view that we should try to reason with the rise of fundamentalist Islam. It has set itself up against us, for whatever reasons you may wish to believe, and now must be fought.

How about the rise of fundamentalist "westernness"? Surely, if the statement that westernisation (i.e. the way it is -now- and a bit back in time) is the only way to prosper, the only sensible thing to do when faced with this change is to try as hard as humanly possible to stop it. Anything else would be silly, as it'd only contribute to our own nations' downfall.

And please don't downplay the importance of your own words. If you truly were 100% convinsed that noone would ever read what you said and nod a bit and go "hmm, that makes sense", why post? Why not just write it up in Notepad?

You cann't be serrious. You would rather live in a society where women are second class citzens, not allowed in the workforce, and can be legally beat by thier husbands?

I have nfc what you're talking about. The statement was made that any country who don't "westernise" itself has "failed". And my thoughts on that was - well - the west is de-westernising itself at the moment with the rise of the fundamental and less-than-freedom-for-all loving attitudes; and as such the western countries are on their way to "failure". Given that, I asked if this trend wasn't something that needs to be fought.

It's not political correctness to believe that if you antagonize moderate Muslims long enough you'll lose them as your allies in the fight against terrorism. The terrorists and those advocating violence are a minority and whatever methods we use to fight terrorism, they need to take that into account.

If you believe they are a minority you are deluding yourself.

Arab nations have never been our allies in the fight against terrorism. They take our money with one hand then give it to terror organizations with the other. The only time they cooperate is when we brow-beat them into it. With the exception of Jordan, who is terrified of the Palestinians.

Terrorists are a cheap and abundant weapon. You can kill them by the dozen but if you don't address the reasons that lead to them becoming terrorists then there will be plenty more to take their place.

The reason they became terrorists is because the Arab nations could not defeat Israel in conventional war. Why can't you understand that there is nothing we can do to address the reasons that lead them to become terrorists aside from surrender.

They firmly believe they must A) Destroy the Jews B) Get the West out of the Middle-East and C) Spread Islam throughout the world by force.

Until they stop teaching these ideals to their grammar school children...they leave us no choice but to combat them as far from our shores as possible.

How about the rise of fundamentalist "westernness"?

Ah yes, the rise of fundamentalist freedom, equality, and economic systems where people don't starve.

Surely, if the statement that westernisation (i.e. the way it is -now- and a bit back in time) is the only way to prosper, the only sensible thing to do when faced with this change is to try as hard as humanly possible to stop it. Anything else would be silly, as it'd only contribute to our own nations' downfall.

I never said Westernization can remain stagnant and not evolve, itself. But, I'm sorry, history has shown those nations which embrace the good aspects of Western ideals succeed and their people prosper.

The worst thing that ever happened to sub-saharan africa was the disengagement of the Imperial powers. Since that time, instead of independence, they've fallen into a repeating cycle of despotism, mass disease, and poverty beyond anyplace else in the world. At least as colonies they ate, even if they didn't have freedom.

The same can be said of most of Asia. What nations are prospering in Asia? Those nations which have become relatively Westernized.

Now, do I advocate pushing Westernization on the world? No, let them do as they please, so long as they don't A) Try to overthrow our way of life B) Don't butcher each other or C) Ask us for financial help.

If you want Western money to help your starving people...embrace our ideals. Have free elections. Have relative equality amongst the sexes and for minorities. Be willing to accept that we know what we're talking about when we tell you that sleeping with virgin women won't ****ing cure your AIDS. Accept that when we send you polio vaccine, we're trying to ensure a disease we killed off 50 years ago in the US doesn't come back, not trying to poison you.



And please don't downplay the importance of your own words. If you truly were 100% convinsed that noone would ever read what you said and nod a bit and go "hmm, that makes sense", why post? Why not just write it up in Notepad?

Because I love to argue.

I have nfc what you're talking about. The statement was made that any country who don't "westernise" itself has "failed". And my thoughts on that was - well - the west is de-westernising itself at the moment with the rise of the fundamental and less-than-freedom-for-all loving attitudes; and as such the western countries are on their way to "failure". Given that, I asked if this trend wasn't something that needs to be fought.

And it does need to be fought. Everyday there are those in the US who rail against our loss of freedoms. But that is a seperate issue from our need to fight back against fundamentalist Islam.

If you believe they are a minority you are deluding yourself.

Arab nations have never been our allies in the fight against terrorism. They take our money with one hand then give it to terror organizations with the other. The only time they cooperate is when we brow-beat them into it. With the exception of Jordan, who is terrified of the Palestinians.

The reason they became terrorists is because the Arab nations could not defeat Israel in conventional war. Why can't you understand that there is nothing we can do to address the reasons that lead them to become terrorists aside from surrender.

They firmly believe they must A) Destroy the Jews B) Get the West out of the Middle-East and C) Spread Islam throughout the world by force.

Until they stop teaching these ideals to their grammar school children...they leave us no choice but to combat them as far from our shores as possible

The British police have said again today that in all likelihood the bombers were British nationals and it would be wrong for people to delude themselves otherwise. So stop deluding yourself! ;)

These terrorists are likely to have gone to the same schools and lived in the same streets as law abiding Brits. Whatever bad choices they made to become terrorists, those choices could have been different. These people are a minority amongst British muslims.

If you believe they are a minority you are deluding yourself.

Arab nations have never been our allies in the fight against terrorism. They take our money with one hand then give it to terror organizations with the other. The only time they cooperate is when we brow-beat them into it. With the exception of Jordan, who is terrified of the Palestinians.A little oversimplified, but it will do. Arabic nations don't LIKE Americans because they believe that they are superior to us. Consequently, we Americans tend to believe that we're superior to everyone else. But the Arabs aren't stupid as many Americans believe (which is often assumed when a race is different and speaks broken or accented American English) and they know that taking our money makes us believe that we can control them. It's all a game to them, as it is with many others who take our money.
The reason they became terrorists is because the Arab nations could not defeat Israel in conventional war. Why can't you understand that there is nothing we can do to address the reasons that lead them to become terrorists aside from surrender.

They firmly believe they must A) Destroy the Jews B) Get the West out of the Middle-East and C) Spread Islam throughout the world by force.

Until they stop teaching these ideals to their grammar school children...they leave us no choice but to combat them as far from our shores as possible.Having lived in the Middle East for a few years, I have to agree with Aidon. Westerners tend to assume that they can understand Arabic nations by applying western ideologies to their actions. You can't do it. They don't think like we do and most Americans won't take the time to learn what it is that drives them, but with "news" being spread the second something happens, the modern world has given terrorists an invaluable and VERY effective tool.

Oh... and "official citizenship" means nothing.

Yeah, as we in the states know, you don't need to import terrorism, you can grow your own.

If you believe they are a minority you are deluding yourself.

Arab nations have never been our allies in the fight against terrorism.
I didn't say Arab nations I said moderate Muslims. Condemnation of terrorist acts and philosophies by moderate Muslims is more likely to reduce the crop of potential terrorist recruits than anything the US does.

The British police have said again today that in all likelihood the bombers were British nationals and it would be wrong for people to delude themselves otherwise. So stop deluding yourself! ;)

These terrorists are likely to have gone to the same schools and lived in the same streets as law abiding Brits. Whatever bad choices they made to become terrorists, those choices could have been different. These people are a minority amongst British muslims.

Did they go to the same Sunday school as law abiding Brits?

And British nationals doesn't mean British educated.

And if you think those people are a minority amongst Biritsh muslims...you are deluding yourself. There is a thin line between the bomber and the muslim who simply gives money to the bomber.

I didn't say Arab nations I said moderate Muslims. Condemnation of terrorist acts and philosophies by moderate Muslims is more likely to reduce the crop of potential terrorist recruits than anything the US does.

Moderate muslims condemning terror has never persuaded terrorists to change their ways. Not in thirty years.

Of course part of that is while they condemn them at the table, beneath the table they are handing them money.

And if you think those people are a minority amongst Biritsh muslims...you are deluding yourself.

Uhm.. did you just say that there's a -majority- of British muslims who support terrorist acts such as the one we just saw in London?

Moderate muslims condemning terror has never persuaded terrorists to change their ways. Not in thirty years.
Why? Because you say so? In any case, you're refuting an assertion I never made.

And if you think those people are a minority amongst Biritsh muslims...you are deluding yourself.
Wow. If you belive that the majority of Muslims support terrorists you're more paranoid than I was giving you credit for.

And if you think those people are a minority amongst Biritsh muslims...you are deluding yourself.

And you base your opinion on ..... what exactly? I base my opinion on people I have met in everyday life, from fellow schoolchildren, fellow students, work colleagues, taxi drivers, shop owners, and everyone else who I've met in my life who is a muslim. They are not any of them terrorists or supporters of terrorism and many of them are schooled or work alongside jews, christians, hindus, or whatever else. There are racial tensions of course but that's evident in all multi-racial communities around the world. I even managed to get myself physically assaulted by a gang of young black teenagers just last night with an asian taxi driver and other white drivers passing by and ignoring my plight. Isn't modern society wonderful.

I even managed to get myself physically assaulted by a gang of young black teenagers just last night with an asian taxi driver and other white drivers passing by and ignoring my plight. Isn't modern society wonderful.
Yikes! I hope you're okay. If you're not sick of telling the story, what happened?

A couple of young kids were throwing stones at my car at some traffic lights so I got out to stop them. Their big (well over 6 foot) friend and a few others turned up and punched me and the rest joined in, even the young ones. I got a black eye, cut lip, broken tooth, usual stuff. It could have been lot worse really if they'd had knives and stuff or decided to really hurt me or rob me. It's with the police and given all the witnesses just drove by it's hard to see any arrests coming.

Duh! No offense, but if you see a group of kids throwing rocks at cars and you want to do something about it, call the cops. Getting out and walking up to someone who might turn and pelt rocks at you, or worse, pull a knife, isn't the brightest thing to do. Just like terrorists, they aren't gonna play by YOUR rules, but the rules that THEY want to play by to "win".

You cited "racial tensions" in your post. Do you REALLY believe that they attacked you solely based on their racial principles? Or did you mean that because they were black (which you made a point to be specific about) that they are bound to attack other races they see?

I'm sorry you got attacked but it sounds to me like you walked right into it. :/

:confused:

If you are trying to prove a point about issues in the mid-east, you need to move to religious ideologies, not racial issues.

Ack, Anka! I'm sorry to hear that. :( I hope justice gets done.

It's with the police and given all the witnesses just drove by it's hard to see any arrests coming.

I hope you recover.

Have you considered posting a newspaper ad asking if anyone saw the incident?

In any case, it is the ambivalence toward the situation is the problem. Good people doing nothing.

I am confused if you are saying that it was your car or a taxi. If it was a taxi, why did you get out?

Have you considered buying a can of Mace? I know that England has slightly different laws that the US so it might not be legal.

Duh! No offense, but if you see a group of kids throwing rocks at cars and you want to do something about it, call the cops. Getting out and walking up to someone who might turn and pelt rocks at you, or worse, pull a knife, isn't the brightest thing to do. Just like terrorists, they aren't gonna play by YOUR rules, but the rules that THEY want to play by to "win".

You cited "racial tensions" in your post. Do you REALLY believe that they attacked you solely based on their racial principles? Or did you mean that because they were black (which you made a point to be specific about) that they are bound to attack other races they see?

I only saw the two younger kids, about 10 or so, when I got out. I don't like surrendering to low level vandlism and I don't want to be frightened of any child yob doing anything. Kids shouldn't make adults afraid, it's simply wrong, and it encourages their bad behavoir. We shouldn't throw away all the rules that make our societies work, such as child discipline, or let kids scare them away from us.

Of course, I wouldn't make the decision to get out of my car again unless I knew the neighbourhood very well now.

A large amount of crime in the UK is black on black, so it might have happened whatever my skin. I'm guessing they'd hit anyone they didn't like but would take a bit longer to get round to hitting some people than others.

A large amount of crime in the UK is black on black, so it might have happened whatever my skin. I'm guessing they'd hit anyone they didn't like but would take a bit longer to get round to hitting some people than others.Oh now I'm REALLY confused... There are racial tensions of course but that's evident in all multi-racial communities around the world. I even managed to get myself physically assaulted by a gang of young black teenagers just last night with an asian taxi driver and other white drivers passing by and ignoring my plight. Isn't modern society wonderful.Where are the "racial tensions"? And what does the kids being black have to do with the story?

It has to do with the story as it's true. Just what are driving at by your feigned confusion?

Nothing, I suppose. You pushed the "racial" issue in your post and when asked directly about it you refused to touch it. That answers the questions *I* had.

If you've answered the wrong questions with the wrong answers then you've got double trouble.

I mentioned it because there are are racial difficulties in Britain, but possibly no more or less than elsewhere. There are disaffected your people from all races and religions about. Just as there are angry muslims youths who want to hit out at the injustices they see, there are angry black youths who just want to hit out and angry white youths too. It doesn't mean that a majority of black kids are thugs any more than it means a majority of muslims are terrorists.

As Klath said (pages ago), we have to try to stop organisations recruiting these angry young men and stop them turning into terrorists, or any other sort of criminal for that matter.

I got a black eye, cut lip, broken tooth, usual stuff. It could have been lot worse really if they'd had knives and stuff or decided to really hurt me or rob me.
Ouch, sounds painful but I'm glad to hear it wasn't worse.

It's with the police and given all the witnesses just drove by it's hard to see any arrests coming.
Do they have street cameras where it happened or is that only in places like downtown London?

As Klath said (pages ago), we have to try to stop organisations recruiting these angry young men and stop them turning into terrorists, or any other sort of criminal for that matter.They are NOT "angry young men". They're people who have been raised with a certain ideology and believe so strongly in it that they have no qualms about dying for their cause. Theirs is an inbred theology and ideology that has been a part of their homeland culture for thousands of years. They are NOT societal misfits who, through a string of bad luck in their early lives have decided to take on the world at all costs. Rest assured that these terrorists are NOT a product of blighted neighborhoods who had a lack of parental guidance in their teenaged years. They are missionaries for their cause.

If you want to "stop organisations recruiting these angry young men and them turning them into terrorists", you have to change the very core beliefs of their homeland. Religion is interwoven into every minute facet of a middle easterner's life. They LIVE their religions. We just VISIT ours every Sunday. Westerners are fat and lazy and we defend our principles by convenience. We don't have a "common enemy" that unites us ALL the time. We can't understand those who do. Even in the fight against terrorism... although we are all horrified, what have we done individually to defend our country? The majority of us don't even vote!

**edit note**
I just backtracked in this thread to find Klath's post on the statement you credit to her. I couldn't find it.

Uhm.. did you just say that there's a -majority- of British muslims who support terrorist acts such as the one we just saw in London?

The majority of them will, of course, decry bombings such as that in London, in public. Many of them are saying "You get what you deserve" and many of them send money back "home" which pays for terror.

I can assure you the majority of the Arabs in the Mid-East support it, or perhaps you forget the scenes from the West Bank, Gaza, and Iraw of thousands upon thousands of people out cheering after 9/11.

They are NOT "angry young men". They're people who have been raised with a certain ideology and believe so strongly in it that they have no qualms about dying for their cause. Theirs is an inbred theology and ideology that has been a part of their homeland culture for thousands of years. They are NOT societal misfits who, through a string of bad luck in their early lives have decided to take on the world at all costs. Rest assured that these terrorists are NOT a product of blighted neighborhoods who had a lack of parental guidance in their teenaged years. They are missionaries for their cause.

I'm sorry but do you believe that everyone that is a criminal was raised to be a criminal? There are people that go to jail everyday that were raised to be law abiding citizens and aren't. Gangs recruit youths from non gang households. Mafia's recruit youths from non Mafia families. Terrorist organizations can recruit terrorists from non terriorist families.

If you want to "stop organisations recruiting these angry young men and them turning them into terrorists", you have to change the very core beliefs of their homeland. Religion is interwoven into every minute facet of a middle easterner's life. They LIVE their religions. We just VISIT ours every Sunday. Westerners are fat and lazy and we defend our principles by convenience. We don't have a "common enemy" that unites us ALL the time. We can't understand those who do. Even in the fight against terrorism... although we are all horrified, what have we done individually to defend our country? The majority of us don't even vote!

Have you read the Koran? Do you know what the muslim religion is? Do you understand that the sects of the muslim population that believe in jihad are very very small in comparrison to the world muslim population?

The majority of them will, of course, decry bombings such as that in London, in public. Many of them are saying "You get what you deserve" and many of them send money back "home" which pays for terror.

"many" is such a relative term. Calling someone dilluded if they think only minority of the British muslims supported the London bombings isn't. So you kinda ain't answering my question there, hobbit :)

I can assure you the majority of the Arabs in the Mid-East support it, or perhaps you forget the scenes from the West Bank, Gaza, and Iraw of thousands upon thousands of people out cheering after 9/11.

Well, I also saw the crowds cheering when the US troops arrived. So I guess I'll ask - based on what do you conclude? Seems to me if we're using TV footage as our source for The Truth(tm) it can just as easily be used to argue the exact oposite point to yours.

"many" is such a relative term. Calling someone dilluded if they think only minority of the British muslims supported the London bombings isn't. So you kinda ain't answering my question there, hobbit :)

I think you're deluding yourself if you think the majority of muslims in Britain (or the US) are not directly or indirectly supporting terror organizations.

Now, being that you are European, I suspect you probably don't consider groups like Hamas, PLFP, Hizbollah, and Islamic Jihad terrorist groups, since they pretty much focus on Israel. But they are all funded by various Arab "charities"..and Western muslims donate to those charities every day.



Well, I also saw the crowds cheering when the US troops arrived. So I guess I'll ask - based on what do you conclude? Seems to me if we're using TV footage as our source for The Truth(tm) it can just as easily be used to argue the exact oposite point to yours.

I don't need to base it on TV. I know what they are being taught in their schools and madrases. I've seen the text books. I can assure you, they aren't learning tolerance for other cultures.

They are NOT "angry young men". They're people who have been raised with a certain ideology and believe so strongly in it that they have no qualms about dying for their cause. Theirs is an inbred theology and ideology that has been a part of their homeland culture for thousands of years. They are NOT societal misfits who, through a string of bad luck in their early lives have decided to take on the world at all costs. Rest assured that these terrorists are NOT a product of blighted neighborhoods who had a lack of parental guidance in their teenaged years. They are missionaries for their cause.
Do you believe that everyone raised in an Arab country is a terrorist? If not, what factors prevented some of them from becoming terrorists?

Now, being that you are European, I suspect you probably don't consider groups like Hamas, PLFP, Hizbollah, and Islamic Jihad terrorist groups, since they pretty much focus on Israel.

So your prejudice has expanded to europeans now. How sad :/

I don't think Aidon's prejudice has expanded to Europe, it's always included us horrible anti-semitic Europeans ;). I seem to remember that he didn't consider the IRA and ETA to be real terrorist groups for some reason.

Thanks for the concern everyone. I'm feeling a bit less grouchy and irritated today, although that might change after I visit the dentist.

They are NOT "angry young men". They're people who have been raised with a certain ideology and believe so strongly in it that they have no qualms about dying for their cause. Theirs is an inbred theology and ideology that has been a part of their homeland culture for thousands of years. They are NOT societal misfits who, through a string of bad luck in their early lives have decided to take on the world at all costs. Rest assured that these terrorists are NOT a product of blighted neighborhoods who had a lack of parental guidance in their teenaged years. They are missionaries for their cause.
The most recent episode of Frontline ("Al Qaeda's New Front") contains numerous interviews with terrorism experts which contradict you.

From Frontline's interview (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/etc/today.html) w/Marc Sageman:
Whatever commonalities there might appear to be, Sageman says, there is no psychological common denominator among the terrorists he studied, aside from their link to the jihad. "There's really no profile, just similar trajectories to joining the jihad and that most of these men were upwardly and geographically mobile," he says. "Because they were the best and brightest, they were sent abroad to study. They came from moderately religious, caring, middle-class families. They're skilled in computer technology. They spoke three, four, five, six languages including three predominant Western languages: German, French and English."

But according to Sageman, despite their intellectual acuity, his subjects were ultimately ill-prepared for life in the West. He traced their transition to radicalism back to a universal human motivation -- loneliness. "When they became homesick, they did what anyone would and tried to congregate with people like themselves, whom they would find at mosques," he explains. "They drifted towards the mosque, not because they were religious, but because they were seeking friends."

These cliques often formed in the vicinity of mosques that had a militant script advocating violence to overthrow the corrupt regimes, thereby transforming these alienated young Muslims into terrorists.

"It's all really group dynamics," he told an audience last year. "You cannot understand the 9/11 type of terrorism from individual characteristics." Sageman points to the Madrid bombers, who blew themselves up when the police surrounded their apartment, as a perfect example: "Seven terrorists sharing an apartment and one saying, 'Tonight we're all going to go, guys.' You can't betray your friends, and so you go along. Individually, they probably would not have done it."