OT: More on the London bombings.

You would condemn a whole community based on the advice of "a senior Muslim" in a different country? You'd be pleased that Muslims in the UK came under attack for the actions of a radical few? I think that's really shameful.

Elizabeth

I hope the attacks on Muslims slow down, but, unfortunately they were only to be expected at this moment in time. I haven`t seen anything of this on the news, though.

As long as the Muslims are really seen to be assisting the police - as they appear to be doing, even to the extent of the parents of one of the four would-be-bombers identifying their son, there should be no serious backlash. Hopefully!

I am afraid that Sir Ian Blair is likely to be right. The bombers already in the news are likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. The best we can all do is to be vigilant and go about our normal business. I think it will be a long time before the police will be able to return to normality, though.

I`m amazed that your Muslims are not legally bound to co-operate. Still, that`s not quite the same as actively breaking the law, I suppose. I imagine that it`s the same here, really - you can`t force people to give information without bringing back torture!!!

Pat P

In many ways, a very definite "YES!!!". I am a believer in "just wars", and if the UK population "declared war" on its Muslim minority at this time, I think this would qualify as a "just war". But probably more important and fundamental is an idea that can best be illustrated with an old joke. A dealer hired out a mule and cart to customers. His instructions were to treat the mule gently and kindly, and it would do anything. If a customer complained the mule was stubbon, the dealer picked up a huge piece of two by four, and gave the mule several large whacks on its backside. When it was pointed out that this was not exactly treating the mule kindly, the dealer noted that "first you have to get its attention". It is generally agreed that law enforcement agencies cannot root out Al Qaeda sleeper cells by themselves; they need the *full* cooperation of the Muslim community. One wonders how many "large whacks on its backside" Muslim communities in Western democracies need to be given, before they get the message.

-- Jim Cripwell. From Canada. Land of the Key Bird. This creature of doom flies over the frozen tundra in winter, shrieking its dreaded call; "Key, Key, Key, Key rist but it's cold!!"

"Pat P" ( snipped-for-privacy@ntlworld.com) writes: (snip)

I probably did not emphasise the key word; *security* forces, not law enforcement agencies. Our organization is CSIS (Canadian Security and Intelligence Services), not the same as, but vaguely like your MI5. There is no law that says you *must* cooperate with CSIS, as there is with police forces.

-- Jim Cripwell. From Canada. Land of the Key Bird. This creature of doom flies over the frozen tundra in winter, shrieking its dreaded call; "Key, Key, Key, Key rist but it's cold!!"

It is a pity that the muslims couldn't of wiped out England back in the crusades. England was clearly terrorizing them. Maybe the UK should just bulldoze all the muslim houses down on the heads of the children. Violence has always worked so well. I always tell the kids, "Be sure that you think that you are right and then inflict as much damage as possible on the other kid."

Now that I think about it, I could see some of these people taking my post seriously. I think that it is so sad that people can't get over the hate and violence. When you are sure that you are right, you are wrong. There is no one way to look at a thing. Judy

I think your ignorance is showing. There is nothing just about war against innocent bystanders. There is an exact definition of and literature surrounding the concept of "just war" and your are clearly unfamiliar with it. I suggest you do some reading. Start with Walzer if you don't know where else to start:

About as many wacks on the backside as stupid old intolerant white men need before they begin to see that THEY are at the root of the problem in the first place.

Elizabeth

Jim doesn't know it, but I guess you're not reading his posts very carefully.

Elizabeth

I don't think a smile would be right in that case. Sounds very scary, I haven't seen a tornado in years. Judy

Prejudice would indicate that Jim had said nothing to warrent my condemnation of him. That's not the case.

Could you fix your settings so that your .sig file is at the end and your posts can be quoted properly, please?

Elizabeth

Judy was responding to Jim. You responded to Judy. It was logical of me to therefore think that you included Jim in your "we."

Elizabeth

And why do you suppose that is? Are you not the least bit curious about what makes these people so hopeless or so full of hate that they would give their lives to hurt you and yours? I am.

Elizabeth

I don`t actually CARE what you think.

Yes, I know. It's what makes conversations with you so useless. I had forgotten that. I'm sorry.

Elizabeth