PDA

View Full Version : Fear in the city



JAG
07-27-2005, 08:37
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1535944,00.html


Fear in the city

After the July 7 bombings, much was made of London's defiance towards the terrorists. But today, following another anxious week, the capital's mood seems less sure. Can things ever return to normal, wonders Tim Dowling.

Tuesday July 26, 2005
The Guardian

I can pretty well pinpoint the moment when my own spirit of defiance started to fade. It was on Saturday morning. I was with the dog in the park opposite our house, chatting to a woman with a boxer while watching two uniformed policeman comb the undergrowth. It's not unusual to see police in Little Wormwood Scrubs; the place has of late become something of a centre of excellence for delinquents. It is unusual, however, to be ordered to leave the area by a plainclothes officer citing the presence of a suspicious device. It is strange to watch the whole park being festooned in police tape, to see cops with machine-guns and earpieces standing on the corner. A huge security cordon was thrown up, with our house inside it.

At this point I was still feeling rather reassured by what I assumed was a ridiculous, if understandable, overreaction on the part of the police. People set fire to stolen scooters in our park, but they do not plants bombs there. We stood out on the front step in order to see what was happening, only to be told by a policeman that we must remain indoors. He was clearly looking for a phrase to describe the seriousness of the situation without telling us any more than he needed to. The words he chose were: "It's got nails in." That was when my defiance evaporated.

The spirit of the Blitz was invoked shortly after the bombings of Thursday July 7, and it seemed to resonate immediately. Those directly affected by the attacks - the injured, the emergency services, the families of those killed or hurt - did indeed behave with courageous stoicism, and Londoners took a little reflected pride in their dignity. Mayor Ken Livingstone, a divisive figure at the best of times, made an emotional statement which perfectly captured the mood of the capital, even though he was in Singapore. "Londoners will not be divided by the cowardly attack," he said, his voice angry and raw. "They will stand together in solidarity ... and that is why I'm proud to be the mayor of that city."

The next day people made their way to work, an act that was to become imbued with meaning. In different circumstances a business-as-usual approach to such a tragedy might have seemed callous, but those deeply affected by the bombings and those who were merely inconvenienced (I count myself firmly among the latter; I was in Paris) were united behind the idea that getting on with life sent the terrorists the right message. The buses filled up again. On Monday, Livingstone took the tube to work as normal, elevating the grim grind of the daily commute into a provocative political statement.

At the same time, the hastily set-up website Werenotafraid.com became a clearinghouse for various expressions of defiance, an almost direct response to the terrorists' online claim of responsibility, which asserted that "Britain is now burning with fear". Some of the postings on werenotafraid.com were moving, some were mawkish, a few strayed into reckless bravado, but the overall tone was one of simple solidarity, amplified by the huge number of respondents.

And in London things certainly seemed to be getting back to normal. Tourist numbers began to recover. Some 20,000 people turned up to the National Gallery's Stubbs exhibition last Wednesday. Despite stern warnings from the security services about the possibility of more attacks, it seemed like it would be a good long while before terrorists dared to test our vigilance again.

The second attack changed all that. While the display of defiance probably peaked at the impromptu street party in Shepherds Bush Green, which was brought to a halt after a bomb failed to go off on a nearby tube train, in retrospect this seemed like a slightly giddy reaction to what turned out to be an extremely close call. The half-certainties we had let ourselves adopt were shattered. We had hoped that Britain contained a fairly limited supply of home-grown suicide bombers; it was even possible that the first four had been tricked into sacrificing their lives. We can discount that idea now.

Since Thursday, carrying on as normal has become rather more difficult. No one was injured in the attacks, but I know people in Shepherds Bush who weren't allowed to go home for two days. In Kilburn, in Tulse Hill and Stockwell - parts of London previously enveloped in the safety of shaggy anonymity - residents found the anti-terrorist operation had arrived on their doorsteps. If most of us have thus far escaped tragedy, few Londoners remain untouched by fear. On Friday, the police shot an innocent Brazilian man in Stockwell station, and the potential for disaster expanded. It's not enough to spot terrorists on the tube, you must take active steps to avoid looking like one. Watching events unfold on television (interspersed with long, defiant stretches of cricket) I had the sense of things getting unpleasantly close to home, and that was before someone left a nail bomb in the park where my children play. I know this hardly compares to the Blitz, in which 43,000 Londoners perished, but I still find the idea of exhibiting pluck in the circumstances oddly draining. I feel lucky, but I don't feel plucky.

When Inter Milan tried to cancel its UK tour last week, Livingstone's outraged response rang curiously hollow. "The terrorists, I am sure, will be celebrating their decision," he said. "We cannot allow the terrorists to change the way we live or they will be very close to their aim." Who in London hasn't changed the way they live, or had it changed for them? I don't know about you, but yesterday I had to go through a police checkpoint to buy milk. People have stopped taking rucksacks out with them. They've stopped riding on the top deck of the bus. When it was first reported that bicycle sales had doubled in the capital, the statistic was interpreted as a plucky response to a badly damaged transport network - people were getting to and from work any way they could - but it may well turn out that a certain percentage of commuters have forsaken the tube permanently.

On Sunday morning, we were woken by the muffled crump of a controlled explosion. Although the bomb has been taken away, as I write this the police are still here and the park is still closed. I don't know whether I want them to stay or not. For the moment I live in unprecedented safety - a veritable gated community - but I must admit I'm now afraid; afraid that another attack is imminent, afraid of the idea of 3,000 armed police on the streets, afraid that London will never quite be the same again, afraid that my children will find out how afraid I am (don't worry, they'll never read this far). Carrying on as normal seems less politically freighted than it did two weeks ago, not least because it's no longer really possible, but you can't say that the terrorists have won just because the cops won't let the postman deliver my Amazon order.


He is right, there is a fear in the city, public transport travel is well down and people are steering clear of the inner city areas and people generally are far more jumpy. I have been on the underground two times since the bombings and both times my train was heavily delayed because of 'bomb scares' at different stations. You can also see it in people on the bus and train, they are very nervous and twitchy.

That also extends to me, yesterday I was on a bus, on the top deck at the back, as normal, reading the Guardian and the whole rest of the top deck was clear. I had a glance over the paper and I saw a muslim looking bloke coming towards me with a bag much like has been used in the attacks and he sat right next to me - even though the whole top bus was empty. For a few seconds I sh*t myself, I bet he could have seen my eyes pop out of my head, it must have been really bad for him because there was no reason for him to be suspected, I then proceeded to feel really bad after I had a quick rational think of the situation and a deep breath. I was even more ashamed of my initial thoughts and reaction when I saw the turban - well the smaller turban version young Sikhs wear - on his head; he wasn't even a muslim. Shame on me really, I felt really bad so I decieded to talk to him - he was a really nice bloke - to try and make myself feeling better, more than anything.

Anyway, funnily enough I was reading the article I just posted at the time, people in London certainly are afraid and I wonder if we ever will snap out of it. The situation really isn't healthy nad muslims on public transport should not have the feeling that they shouldn't carry a bag or are always going to be considered a suspect. :blank2:

el_slapper
07-27-2005, 09:57
Not even in England : a colleague of me told me yesterday there was a "bastard" on the train seat next to him. Proof he was a bastard : "he was wearing a beard and reading arab". And next : "those guys should be all killed".

Man, where fear does lead us?????

Efrem
07-27-2005, 09:58
Anyway, funnily enough I was reading the article I just posted at the time, people in London certainly are afraid and I wonder if we ever will snap out of it. The situation really isn't healthy nad muslims on public transport should not have the feeling that they shouldn't carry a bag or are always going to be considered a suspect.

Well they always will be a suspect and until Chinese or hell any other race or religion starts blowing themselves up on the london public transport system and leaving nail bombs in children's parks I can't see there being a change to that.

The only people in a postion to fight muslim extremeists are moderate muslims, who will be the ones to suffer the social backlash. And its a crying shame, but thats the way it is.

Al Khalifah
07-27-2005, 10:11
Errrgh... the Guardian.

JAG
07-27-2005, 10:45
Efrem, to state that 'only moderates can stop the extremist muslims', is to be far too simplistic. Yes 'moderate' muslims are in the best place to solve the situation, but by our actions in the west we can go a very long way to aiding and abetting it. At the moment our actions just inflame the situation and make it worse. If we seriously want to get rid of the extremists and aide our moderate friends, then we need to sort out our own piece of the pie.

rasoforos
07-27-2005, 10:48
Efrem, to state that 'only moderates can stop the extremist muslims', is to be far too simplistic. Yes 'moderate' muslims are in the best place to solve the situation, but by our actions in the west we can go a very long way to aiding and abetting it. At the moment our actions just inflame the situation and make it worse. If we seriously want to get rid of the extremists and aide our moderate friends, then we need to sort out our own piece of the pie.


True.And at the moment all we seem to be doing is to turn moderates into extremists.

JAG
07-27-2005, 10:53
Not even in England : a colleague of me told me yesterday there was a "bastard" on the train seat next to him. Proof he was a bastard : "he was wearing a beard and reading arab". And next : "those guys should be all killed".

Man, where fear does lead us?????

Indeed. It goes further than that too as well, it has ramifications for other members of society possibly not even muslims - asylum seekers and immigrants. Already we have the right wing press, parties and supporters linking all this back to the 'evil' immigrants and asylum seekers. One of my friends, a politically naive, anti immigration Conservative, stated to me after hours of the bombs in a txt message 'f**king immigrants, see what they do?' And words to that effect; the hate and fear going hand in hand to try and gain political advantage for their favorite past time - demonising immigrants.

Even when it came out the bombers were British citizens and indeed born here, my friend was still adamant - just like the papers have been - and in an illustration of how these sorts of people will twist their logic when encompassing reality, he stated: 'how are they British if they are not white'. At that point I walked away and haven't spoken to him since.

Hate and fear is a toxic mix and I am afraid some nasty people with nasty ideas are going to make great capital out of these bombings, unless sensible people stand up for reality. It is such a shame.

Al Khalifah
07-27-2005, 11:06
Even when it came out the bombers were British citizens and indeed born here
While I have absolutely no idea why I am trying to justify your friend's opinion (which is absurd) it is important to point out that one of the bombers was not born in this country and the rest were 2nd generation British citizens, whose parents were not born in Britain. While they are not immigrants and all had British citizenship, they can hardly be looked at as natives.

A possible reason for why the bombers were so sucessful is that because they are British citizens, the security services were much less suspicious of their actions. Prior to the 7th of July, it was inconcievable that such a menace actually existed within British communities, especially ones of people born in this country. It creates a difficult situation for the security forces, because now they have to deal with the possibility that every muslim in Britain could potentially be another terrorist, even though the vast majority are clearly not.

Fragony
07-27-2005, 11:15
Well according to the daily telepgraph 25% of the brittish muslims openly support the bombings, I wonder how many of the remaining 75% just lied. You have something to be afraid about, at least 100.000 muslims that are sharpening their blades.

Efrem
07-27-2005, 11:34
Well according to the daily telepgraph 25% of the brittish muslims openly support the bombings, I wonder how many of the remaining 75% just lied. You have something to be afraid about, at least 100.000 muslims that are sharpening their blades.



Now that is scary....


Jag, all your doing is apologising for the terrorists.

King Ragnar
07-27-2005, 12:22
Not even in England : a colleague of me told me yesterday there was a "bastard" on the train seat next to him. Proof he was a bastard : "he was wearing a beard and reading arab". And next : "those guys should be all killed".

Doesn't this prove multi cultural communities dont work.

Moros
07-27-2005, 13:27
no it proves that he was a bastard...

25% of the muslims? what are they doing there if they hate it so much?
...
:scared:

_Martyr_
07-27-2005, 13:32
Can we have a link for that please. Its a pretty extreme claim to make without backing it up at all.

Ser Clegane
07-27-2005, 13:38
no it proves that he was a bastard...

25% of the muslims? what are they doing there if they hate it so much?
...
:scared:

Actually Fragony for some reason ( ~;) ) decided to quote the poll incorrectly.

The muslims that "openly supported" the bombings (i.e. thought they were justified) in this poll accounted for 6% (which is of course still a shockingly high number, especially considering that each of them could have easily been a victim themselves).

The 24% rsfers to the


respondents who, while not condoning the London attacks, have some sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who carried [out the bombings]

Which is a "bit" different from "openly supporting" the bombings.

But then those who said that they oppose the bombings probably lied as Fragony suggested :rolleyes:

Ser Clegane
07-27-2005, 13:39
Can we have a link for that please. Its a pretty extreme claim to make without backing it up at all.

Here is the link:
Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/07/23/npoll23.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/07/23/ixnewstop.html)

Moros
07-27-2005, 14:03
Actually Fragony for some reason ( ~;) ) decided to quote the poll incorrectly.

The muslims that "openly supported" the bombings (i.e. thought they were justified) in this poll accounted for 6% (which is of course still a shockingly high number, especially considering that each of them could have easily been a victim themselves).

The 24% rsfers to the



Which is a "bit" different from "openly supporting" the bombings.

But then those who said that they oppose the bombings probably lied as Fragony suggested :rolleyes:
if you ask me 6% is still quite a large number. But 25% was really shocking.
does sombebidy know how many muslims there are in Britain?

_Martyr_
07-27-2005, 14:24
Thanks Ser Clegane. Yeah, I suspected 25% was not accurate. But even 6% is a little shocking. The sample was about 500 muslims. Is this large enough to be accurate? Im not dismissing the poll, Im asking.

Dâriûsh
07-27-2005, 14:41
True.And at the moment all we seem to be doing is to turn moderates into extremists. I don’t think you can turn moderates into extremists. But the moderates can become apathetic while those already radical could be impelled to commit gruesome acts.

PanzerJaeger
07-27-2005, 15:12
The best way to fight these muslim jihadists is to kill them, preferably in Iraq and Afghanistan, but wherever will do the trick. They want their virgins, well they can have them.

Oh and it doesnt surprise me one bit that 6% of muslims in Britain openly support the bombings and 24% passively support them. As Ive said before, this extremism has a popular backing that the media refuses to acknowledge most of the time. For every suicide bomber, im sure there are 100 muslims who proclaim their hatred for the west and urge him on, but dont have the balls to do anything themselves.

Its like in the school yard. There's usually one kid who will always go to extremes to impress the others and succumb to peer pressure.

Taffy_is_a_Taff
07-27-2005, 16:15
If that's the poll I'm thinking of it also reported that about a third of British Muslims want to see the end of Western civilisation. As someone else pointed out, that's scary because that's only the people who openly admit it.

Someone else's question: I think there's 1.5-2 million Muslims in the U.K.

Al Khalifah
07-27-2005, 16:18
Personally, I think any British muslim who agrees with the 7th of July attacks should be deported. If you don't like this country get the hell out because we don't like you.

Infact anyone who agrees with the 7th of July attacks should be deported regardless of religion.

Crazed Rabbit
07-27-2005, 17:25
Doesn't this prove multi cultural communities dont work

They do, but multiculturism, that self loathing, apologist belief that no country or culture is superior, that we have to respect them, does not.

Crazed Rabbit

rasoforos
07-27-2005, 17:27
Personally, I think any British muslim who agrees with the 7th of July attacks should be deported. If you don't like this country get the hell out because we don't like you.

Infact anyone who agrees with the 7th of July attacks should be deported regardless of religion.


The problem is that the government ( and the past ones ) are doing next to nothing to intergrate these people. Noone has tried to make them British and actually many people dont want to. There are ghettos and pockets of people, there are women in Burkas that you see in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, there is no mixing of cultures. You can see sagregation everywhere.

I think that the government should actively teach and pursue the creation of a national identity, nothing radical, just mix ppl and make them feel welcome. Without giving those people a British national identity you cannot hope to achieve results. And with each new generation the situation becomes more dificult to change ( How can a 3rd generation immigrant consider himself 'not British' ? ). A 'when in rome do as the romans do' approach is urgently needed.

I have been living in England for 4 years and I can see myself more adjusted and accepted than a lot of people who lived here all their lives. That is a sign of a society that is not functioning as it should.

BDC
07-27-2005, 17:34
We could do as the Danes do and refuse to allow them to have foreign sprouses. So no more arranged marriages with some uneducated peasant man/woman from the middle of no where who doesn't speak English. Only a small violation of human rights...

King Ragnar
07-27-2005, 17:46
Personally, I think any British muslim who agrees with the 7th of July attacks should be deported. If you don't like this country get the hell out because we don't like you.

Infact anyone who agrees with the 7th of July attacks should be deported regardless of religion.

Well said pal, but the governmant is too soft and cares too much about what other countries think.

Al Khalifah
07-27-2005, 18:07
The problem is that the government ( and the past ones ) are doing next to nothing to intergrate these people.
It's easy to say that the government is doing nothing to integrate these people, but there is also a problem that these peope often do not want to integrate themselves into the community. Minorities tend to huddle themselves into communities so that they do not seem so much like a minority. It's the half a mile or half the world away theory with regards to how far people will move away from home. Many of these 'ghettos' are self inflicted because of an willingess to be in the minority. Also look at mariage rates between different racial groups and religious groups, they are far lower than statistically they should be in a truly integrated community.

rasoforos
07-27-2005, 18:08
We could do as the Danes do and refuse to allow them to have foreign sprouses. So no more arranged marriages with some uneducated peasant man/woman from the middle of no where who doesn't speak English. Only a small violation of human rights...



How about making damn sure women are well educated, free and independent with no fear from fanatic relatives? This way they wont be able to be used as marriagable objects with main use to bring people from abroad through marriage? How can we expect this thing to change when most girls live under the fear oh 'honour murders' ? Better this way

Azi Tohak
07-27-2005, 19:25
It's easy to say that the government is doing nothing to integrate these people, but there is also a problem that these peope often do not want to integrate themselves into the community. Minorities tend to huddle themselves into communities so that they do not seem so much like a minority. It's the half a mile or half the world away theory with regards to how far people will move away from home. Many of these 'ghettos' are self inflicted because of an willingess to be in the minority. Also look at mariage rates between different racial groups and religious groups, they are far lower than statistically they should be in a truly integrated community.

Bad! Bad Al Khalifah! You racist! Bad!

But you know what, you are absoblutely right. The problem is, you are ostracized for mentioning it. We have a Black Student Union association on campus. The most stuck up group of people I have ever met. Of course, since they are black it makes me racist and them oppressed for me to say that. They don't care to do anything with the rest of the organizations on campus. God knows they have to be invited. But what I really liked was this:

http://www.kstatecollegian.com/article.php?a=862

BSU bitches about lack of coverage for a conference. KSU plays dead. We now have a minority faculty advisor. Who does nothing (according to my two friends who write for the paper). But by God, the Collegian swarms anything without white people!

Azi

Alexander the Pretty Good
07-27-2005, 20:11
So 6% wished they did it themselves, and 24% thought the Londoners had it coming. Lovely. Who can say how the other 70% really think? Still, 30% of polled Muslims think that the attacks were justifiable to some degree.

JAG et all agree, of course. What are you going to do, JAG? Apologize at them until the keel over? Please.



How about making damn sure women are well educated, free and independent with no fear from fanatic relatives? This way they wont be able to be used as marriagable objects with main use to bring people from abroad through marriage? How can we expect this thing to change when most girls live under the fear oh 'honour murders' ? Better this way
What, tell them "you will go and get a liberal arts degree or we put you against a wall and shoot you?" It will be just as "racist" or "unacceptable" to force these people to become educated in a Western fashion.

Ser Clegane
07-27-2005, 20:34
So 6% wished they did it themselves, and 24% thought the Londoners had it coming.

Were exactly did you read that?

Alexander the Pretty Good
07-27-2005, 20:43
the proportion of YouGov's respondents who, while not condoning the London attacks, have some sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who carried them out is considerably larger - 24 per cent.
Sympathizing with the motives of the attackers sounds like "thinking the Londoners had it coming" to me.


However, six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.
Which is not far off from wanting to do it themselves. They thought the attacks were justified, meaning they wanted the attacks, or something like them, to happen. Which is just a stone's throw away from wanting to do it yourself.

I may have exaggerated, but I don't think by very much.

Idaho
07-27-2005, 23:07
Sympathizing with the motives of the attackers sounds like "thinking the Londoners had it coming" to me.


Which is not far off from wanting to do it themselves. They thought the attacks were justified, meaning they wanted the attacks, or something like them, to happen. Which is just a stone's throw away from wanting to do it yourself.

I may have exaggerated, but I don't think by very much.

Drivel. 6% of a small sample of 500 (taken where?!?) said that the bombings were justified - ie war in Iraq and Afghanistan should be a war here too.

24% said they understood the motives. I understand the motives - so what?

Alexander the Pretty Good
07-28-2005, 00:33
Drivel. 6% of a small sample of 500 (taken where?!?) said that the bombings were justified - ie war in Iraq and Afghanistan should be a war here too.

You or I can't know how accurate the poll is. I'm drawing my conclusions from the available data. If it's wrong, all I can do is withdraw my conclusions.

And if someone thinks that the war should be in (England and/or the US) as well as in the Middle East, then they want actions like those on July 7th to be perpetrated. It would not be terribly overreaching to suggest that those people (the 6%) would have wanted to do the same thing the attackers did. One reason or another (fear of death, fear of getting caught, responsibilities such as family, lack of resources. laziness) kept them from doing it themselves.


24% said they understood the motives. I understand the motives - so what?
24% sympathized with the attackers' motives, not just understood them. You or I could understand them and still be horrified and/or disgusted by the motives. But that doesn't mean we sympathize with the motives. At least in my mind, sympathizing goes to the stage where you think, "I know why those blokes blew up those subway tunnels. Maybe it wasn't the best thing way to act out their motives, but it must be carried out anyway."

JAG
07-28-2005, 00:37
I have sympathy for the causes of the hate much of the muslims feel. Wow, that makes me a terrorist? I bet that makes ~30% of the whole country - Muslim, Christian, white, black, whatever - a terrorist then, if you are loosing such loose terms.

ICantSpellDawg
07-28-2005, 00:59
24% said they understood the motives. I understand the motives - so what?

i agree - i understand their motives too
i didnt get that the 24% sympathized from what i read

if people like me would have stated that they "understood" some of the reasons for the bombings, wouldnt that calm your mind just a tad about how dangerous the 24% was?

Id bet you that more people who said "No, it is terrible" actually supported them than those who took the moderate and understanding response ( a wild hunch, but i'm gonna expose it)

lets be fair here when discussing this.

Alexander the Pretty Good
07-28-2005, 01:17
There was a difference, no matter how subtle, between merely understanding and sympathizing - because they were different responses.


Moreover, the proportion of YouGov's respondents who, while not condoning the London attacks, have some sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who carried them out is considerably larger - 24 per cent.

A substantial majority, 56 per cent, say that, whether or not they sympathise with the bombers, they can at least understand why some people might want to behave in this way.
56% said they understood. 24% sympathized and we can assume they also understood. The 6% that condoned the attacks must also understand (or we'll assume they do). That leaves 28% of those polled who understood but did not sympathize with the motives or condone the attacks. So sympathizing and understanding are separate things, at least to some of the polled Muslims.

Sympathizing with them doesn't make you a terrorist, JAG. However, my ideas of British citizens who sympathize with them will go un-aired.

And some of the other trends in the article disturb me:


For example, YouGov asked respondents how loyal they feel towards Britain. As the figures in the chart show, the great majority say they feel "very loyal" (46 per cent) or "fairly loyal" (33 per cent) but nearly one British Muslim in five, 18 per cent, feels little loyalty towards this country or none at all.


Equally remarkable are YouGov's findings concerning many Muslims' attitudes towards Western society and culture.

YouGov asked respondents how they feel about Western society and how, if at all, they feel Muslims should adapt to it. A majority, 56 per cent, believe "Western society may not be perfect but Muslims should live with it and not seek to bring it to an end".

However, nearly a third of British Muslims, 32 per cent, are far more censorious, believing that "Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to bring it to an end".

~:eek:

PanzerJaeger
07-28-2005, 01:53
I have sympathy for the causes of the hate much of the muslims feel.

As he said, big difference between understand and sympathize. One makes you intelligent, the other makes you an enabler/apologist. :no:

Which are you? ~:confused:

Azi Tohak
07-28-2005, 05:49
Cause and effect, cause and effect. I think this is an interesting article for this thread:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,542-1708325,00.html


Open societies must find ways of modulating public discourse without losing the openness that defines them.

Does include screaming 'racist!' whenever someone blames the perversion of a religion for what is happening?

Azi

JAG
07-28-2005, 06:23
As he said, big difference between understand and sympathize. One makes you intelligent, the other makes you an enabler/apologist.

Things are not black and white as you so often think they are. It is not either you hate them or you love them - them being the terrorists. Many, many people - I would suggest a vast majority - dislike to a great extent what the terrorists are doing and have done but can understand / sympathise with the reasons for their actions. It is only in your world where that is suddenly apologising for them.

Fragony
07-28-2005, 10:55
Oh common, relativaters are collaboraters. It is pure and simple, hate hate and more hate. Maybe you don't understand because you don't hate, but these fanatics from the religion of pieces all over the place do. There is only one way to counter hate and that is fear, in the old days we would have gone out and cracked their skulls, but I guess we are civilised now. After WW2 we all cried never again, and we let it happen again before our very eyes.

Ser Clegane
07-28-2005, 11:03
@Fragony:

Your PM box is full. I suggest that you have a thorough look at your last post and make some changes...

Fragony
07-28-2005, 11:14
@Fragony:

Your PM box is full. I suggest that you have a thorough look at your last post and make some changes...

That is all you get, changed it to fanatics. Fact remains, we do shit against these butchers, we know exactly where the fanatic mosks are, we know exactly who they are, they openly support the terrorist cause and for some reason they are still standing. That reason being the undying support they get from our fuzzy wuzzy cuddly government that was visiting a burned door at a islamic school when they should have visited the parents of van Gogh.

King Ragnar
07-28-2005, 14:10
He does have a very good point which is my opinion also of the government.