London.

[annis]

Oy.

It's always awful to hear about carnage, but there's some special twinge that comes when you've been to the carnage site. A large chunk of my time in London was spent in the King's Cross station.

I never know what to say. I hope our London textkittens are well.

[Yhevhe]

What happened?

[annis]

What happened?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/ ... efault.stm

The eye-witness accounts I've heard suggest the death toll is much, much higher than the current offical count.

[Emma_85]

What happened?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/ ... efault.stm#

it's terrible...

and I know what you mean Will - I've been to all those stations/places before.

[Yhevhe]

Thank you Will and Emma . . .

This is so bad... Why do citizens have to pay? If they hate G8 so much, they should deal with them, not with innocent citizens.

This is a part of town populated by student halls of residence, big hotels and the buildings of the University of London.

That's just evil.

[amans]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/ ... efault.stm#

I am disgusted. New York, Madrid... now London. Who's next? Hopefully all our textkiti are well.

[edonnelly]

This is so bad... Why do citizens have to pay? If they hate G8 so much, they should deal with them, not with innocent citizens.

Thus it is with terrorists. They hate freedom and they will stop at nothing until they can destroy it. They seek blood and power. You can not use reason to understand their tactics.

[GlottalGreekGeek]

This is so bad... Why do citizens have to pay? If they hate G8 so much, they should deal with them, not with innocent citizens.

If we aren't sluts and heretics, Allah will send us to heaven when we die, so the terrorists are doing us a favor. Besides, citizens (who, not being Islamic extremists, are not innocent) are an easier target than, say, Tony Blair.

I feel for the victims. My visit to London was brief, yet it is my faviorite city from my European travels and I intend to return one day. I also stayed in the university area, and rode the Picadilly line.

[copain]

• It´s really sad, that awful news interrupted my day also !Because I was many times in
  London and have many nice memory´s about it and now that !

[Yhevhe]

If we aren't sluts and heretics, Allah will send us to heaven when we die, so the terrorists are doing us a favor. Besides, citizens (who, not being Islamic extremists, are not innocent) are an easier target than, say, Tony Blair.

Well, you know, they may be using their religion as a tool for doing all this, but it's very sad that people tend to see Islamics as terrorist (I noticed that you used "Islamic extremists", but other people don't)

For me, catholics in the middle ages were terrorists too...

Anyway, what can be done?

[GlottalGreekGeek]

Well, you know, they may be using their religion as a tool for doing all this, but it's very sad that people tend to see Islamics as terrorist (I noticed that you used "Islamic extremists", but other people don't)

Hundreds of Muslims died when the WTC fell. More Muslims than anyone else die in the terrorist attacks in the Middle East. Islam, like most religions, stresses peace over violence, kindness over brutality, and love over hate. But religion does not stop people from being brutal and warlike when they want to be, and who can argue with you if you say God is on your side.

[Emma_85]

This is a part of town populated by student halls of residence, big hotels and the buildings of the University of London.

That's just evil.

yeah... some people I know a bit from a student forum on the web were on their way to those university buildings when it happend and only just missed being caught up in those attacks by a few minutes...

[edonnelly]

Islam, like most religions, stresses peace over violence, kindness over brutality, and love over hate.

While this may be true, I think the religion is suffering a major PR battle because the leaders of this religion fail to speak out when atrocities are commited in its name. We heard days of outrage about the alleged Koran incident in the US prison in Cuba, but hardly a blip is heard from them (especially those leaders living in the Middle East) when thousands are brutally murdered in the name of their religion. It is their silence (or near silence) that is speaking volumes.

[GlottalGreekGeek]

Islam, like most religions, stresses peace over violence, kindness over brutality, and love over hate.

While this may be true, I think the religion is suffering a major PR battle because the leaders of this religion fail to speak out when atrocities are commited in its name. We heard days of outrage about the alleged Koran incident in the US prison in Cuba, but hardly a blip is heard from them (especially those leaders living in the Middle East) when thousands are brutally murdered in the name of their religion. It is their silence (or near silence) that is speaking volumes.

I agree. There is an islamic feminist, whose name escapes me, who writes all about this and calls out for a reform in Islamic thought (not in the core religion, but it how people use it to justify their actions). I am relieved that such voices exist, and someday I might get around to reading the book.

[Parthenophilus]

Islam, like most religions, stresses peace over violence, kindness over brutality, and love over hate.

This is just ignorant. Islam was a violent totalitarian idiology from it's inception. Muhammed was and extremely brutal and violent man. If you are looking for a muslim living today who is most like Muhammed, look no further than Osama bin Laden. It is the "moderate" muslims who are the aberration.

Fortunately, most muslims are as ignorant of their own religion as Christians are of theirs. It is only this ignorance that makes it possible to be a moderate muslim. Unfortunately O.B.L. is not ignorant, and that is why we have reason to fear him.

Don't fall for this islam-is-a-religion-of peace claptrap from the likes of Blair and Bush. A small amount of research will disabuse you of that fantasy.

[Yhevhe]

I guess nobody will ever know the truth about Muhammad, so, the rest just relies on how people interprets his book and religion. If people want to see the good side of it, they will see it, if they want to see the bad side, they will see it too. I don't know much about what Bush or Blair say, but lately I've been interested in Islamism, knowing that it is hard to deal with faithful nations without having notions of their religion. Not too much time ago I did a small essay on Muhammad, and found him a most interesting character. Of course, I found opinions from one side and another, and I guess much about him is pure myth.

From what I read, the Q'ran has two main parts: one that speaks of the philosophy, and the other that is more political and war like. I understand, because he was the founder of a great nation, and a great country at that time, so he had to give it's country a good base to start with. Even then, it is said that every line from the Q'ran has 7 interpretations, so... you could interpret the whole book as you like, giving the political part a more deep sense. I think of it like a mirror: the ones who see crap, are crap.

Plus, why did such a great empire flourish after Muhammad's dead, if their base was a brutal ideology? I think that an arabic like palace, where maths were studied, and beautiful perfumed princesess dwelt, is far more appealing than a stone cold castle full of infested rats.

That's my opinion, I may be terribly wrong in many aspects, but I'm here to learn.

[edonnelly]

Plus, why did such a great empire flourish after Muhammad's dead, if their base was a brutal ideology? I think that an arabic like palace, where maths were studied, and beautiful perfumed princesess dwelt, is far more appealing than a stone cold castle full of infested rats.

One could say the same thing about the ancient Romans, but they were a fairly brutal people by modern standards. Life wasn't too great if you lived in the Roman empire but were not a Roman citizen. I think it is possible to have both culture and brutality.

[1%homeless]

Islam was a violent totalitarian idiology from it's inception. Muhammed was and extremely brutal and violent man. If you are looking for a muslim living today who is most like Muhammed, look no further than Osama bin Laden. It is the "moderate" muslims who are the aberration.

Waiting for Raya and Episcopus...

[Kasper]

Islam, like most religions, stresses peace over violence, kindness over brutality, and love over hate.

This is just ignorant. Islam was a violent totalitarian idiology from it's inception. Muhammed was and extremely brutal and violent man. If you are looking for a muslim living today who is most like Muhammed, look no further than Osama bin Laden. It is the "moderate" muslims who are the aberration.
.

Luke 19:27
Jesus himself: "the enemies of mine, those unwilling for me to be king over them, bring them here and slaughter then before me." (my translation)

I just happen to be reading Luke on the trian to work this week and by mere coincidence read this today. Let's not just point the finger at Islam and say it is violent and brutal, because when taking statements out of context many ideologies can be held to be brutal.
As terrible as this event is, is it more terrible than the hundreds of thousands of iraqi and afghanistani people who have lost lives and limbs? I am amazed at the infantile conception of today's world leaders. "With our powers combined we are captain planet and when we break through these orks we shall cast the ring into mount doom and destroy evil forever!"
There is no evil, people just do what they believe (at time erringly) will benefit them. Just like we feel we should protect our way of life, Islamic "extremists" wish to protect theirs. Just like we went out to blow up what we saw as a threat to our way of life, they are doing the same.
This doesn't make these bombings right, but for Blair to make a statement along the lines of "we will destroy you before you will destroy us" is so very ignorant.
Maybe one day we will actually ask "Why do they feel threatened by us?" and try to take the source of aggravation away through some compromise.

[Deses]

I particularly enjoyed Blair's statement about the bombings being an attack on the civilized world. Apparently, daily outbursts of violence in Iraq were of no concern for the civilized world. It's basically ok if yellow people kill other yellow people, but when yellow people kill white people in their respective kingdoms that's a big no-no. What the heck, let's show it on CNN all day long!

Of all places, London is supposed to be most prepared for such events. They had to deal with IRA before CIA started pumping money into Muslim fundamentalism in Afganistan. I guess, cameras on every street corner did not help. Geez, I fear to imagine what would have happened were it not for the ever-successful war on terror! So, let the war go on. Even though a proper comparison for such endeavors would be a war on moskitos with ballistic misiles.

[edonnelly]

Maybe one day we will actually ask "Why do they feel threatened by us?" and try to take the source of aggravation away through some compromise.

We've been down that road with Chamberlain and the Munich Agreement, which, at the time, was quite popular with the British people. Let us hope we can learn from history.

[mingshey]

Sorry for London victims.
We are on the league, if we wanted it or protested against it, for the invasion of Iraq. So they are on a counterattack, trying all possible means, as we do. Rich countries use face to face fight, they lacking in resource use terrorism. If we don't want terrorism attack, stop invading them. Some people here think Seoul is not attacked yet because it is not a good place for secret operation for those arabic people.

[amans]

Sorry for London victims.
We are on the league, if we wanted it or protested against it, for the invasion of Iraq. So they are on a counterattack, trying all possible means, as we do. Rich countries use face to face fight, they lacking in resource use terrorism. If we don't want terrorism attack, stop invading them. Some people here think Seoul is not attacked yet because it is not a good place for secret operation for those arabic people.

There was terrorism before the invasion of Iraq. Perhaps the terrorist are not just retaliating. Attacking the free world might very well be what's on their agenda.

[mingshey]

Yes. there was terrorist attack. And before that, what was there? And what before that? It's a long history.
They are flesh and blood. There's nothing like infinite energy(to start fighting for no reason every day) or absolute evil. They fight for their interest and against the threat they feel. The western world + so called free world including my country depends on a stable supply of fossil energy. And the Arabs fight against the harnessing devices put on their people for that. We don't grasp what is so painful for them, just like we hardly notice what is so painful for the cows displayed as packaged meats in the supermaket.

[edonnelly]

And the Arabs fight against the harnessing devices put on their people for that. We don't grasp what is so painful for them,

I find it interesting that you lump all "Arabs" into a single group and assume that they are all feeling such pain about freedom coming to their part of the world. The terrorists are not the majority, they are just the most vocal. Should we also give in to the vocal leaders of North Korea -- I'm sure that if they could just have nuclear weapons for "defense" and control of the whole peninsula that a lot of their pain would be eased and there would be great peace and happiness brought to all of the citizens.

[Episcopus]

The ignorance and racism in these parts is shocking, and I do condemn it all.
However, most figures who give public interviews are far too concerned with being politically correct. This is understandable, since any prejudice would result in yet more anger, now from the majority of peaceful muslims in addition. Nevertheless, if I am totally honest with myself, I can not say that I in simple terms like Islam. The ambiguity and confusion of interpretation is the problem: most understand the message of peace and respect for humanity, others read in such a way as to be convinced that god gives permission for killing innocentes. I am sure that they are not allowed in a war to murder women, children, farmers - or any one else not taking part in the fighting. Or does the nationwide 'war on terror' declared by the prime minister mean that every one is a soldier inopinans? Even if the book were clear in her message of peace, the leader set an example which is being followed with pride, once again that killing perhaps professors, a boyfriend and girlfriend in love, a 5 year old with all the joys of life ahead of her in shiny new shoes running at the wall in King's Cross hoping for 9 3/4 is just, merely because these people are not faithful to something invented. Sikhs were peaceful people, but their different beliefs caused them to be hunted down by those Moghul emperors. In spite of this, I heard on the news, "this has been done by people who are frankly evil, there is no other word to describe them or reason for doing this". I disagree with this - there must be a reason, there always has to be. They obviously think that the west is trying to destroy their culture, and the sick things that have happened do merit something in return. But it is never fair even if 50 Iraqis are killed and 50 Britons. Mathematically it is equal but never fair. It doesn't really solve anything. Although I can see their point. Then again those beheadings are just savage and sickening, the result of some pure evil and ideas planted in the mind from a young age.

I will try to give a practical example: people here are very racist, I am surrounded by them all the time, since a young age. Although not at heart, by dialect I find myself somehow subconsciously saying shall we say politically incorrect terms. I have seen this in overprotective parents also, especially in the case of females, the father drumming a certain idea from youth into the mind, and the girl being in a way brainwashed. As if no sanity can prevent this belief anymore.

My father was going to be at King's Cross on that day, but came to visit us instead. The term 'innocent' is used so freely nowadays - 50 innocent victims. We must think of the latin, in- 1/ nocens - harming. What had my father done to deserve any harm had he been there? He had very little control over an army being sent over to Iraq, and harms no one (apart from me when I do something stupid!).

[rimon-jad]

This is taken from aljazeera.com:

In his Fourth of July speech, President George W. Bush, explained to the American people that the central front of the "War On Terror" was Iraq and that thanks to freedom and democracy being patiently groomed with the benevolent help of the U.S. military, supported by the American people through their elected representatives, the "evil terrorists" will be defeated.
But of course, it would be thoughtless to point out that there were no "terrorists" in Iraq before the U.S. benevolent war of liberation; that the Saddam regime had no connection whatsoever with September 11, 2001; and that not one Iraqi national was a member of the 19 highjackers. It would be equally remiss to raise the issue of the non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction, the non-existence of which was well known from 1995 onward.

Not to mention that Muslim leaders condemned London attacks. Open your eyes, people!

[Emma_85]

if anyone is looking for the debate, I move it to here:

viewtopic.php?t=4166

[Lupus minimus]

Thus it is with terrorists. They hate freedom and they will stop at nothing until they can destroy it. They seek blood and power. You can not use reason to understand their tactics.

I think they hate you guys because you think like that.

jc