Originally Posted by darksiderising
Just because it is a analogy involving a terrorist act, it does not make it an invalid one. Please use rationality to make your claim. How is it funny? How is it invalid? Without those key elements of a rational argument, all you are spouting it rhetoric. I am looking for good debate, so please don't throw out meaningless phrases that have been ingrained into the minds of our worldly populations.
And the goals of CM aren't exclusively (maybe not even mostly) political. What about the social aspect? A CM makes it very publicly known that there are members of our population who use alternative means of transportation.
If transportation has become a political debate, then we are worse off than I thought.
If you read my post, you would understand how it is "funny." The goal and tactics of CM are very much like that of terrorists.
Did you honestly believe transportation wasn't a political debate???? It has always been a debate, from horse and buggy to the first automobiles, to safety issues in the 50's and 60's, to the gas guzzlers of the 60's and 70's, and the unreliability of the american cars of the 70's and 80's, and now back to the gas guzzlers known as SUVs and issues with emissions. People have needed to get around since the beginning of time. And since then people have wondered what is the best way. We still don't have an answer.
