B-Line is off course

I am a retired senior citizen. As a frequent traveller into Vancouver by bus, I find the new Vancouver-Richmond bus service very disappointing.

In the past, I have driven to the Sexsmith Park and Ride, and ridden the bus into town from there. Now, the Park and Ride is two blocks from the 98 B-Line bus to Vancouver. The shuttle only operates in peak periods, whatever that means. As I do not normally travel during these times, should I wish to park at the Park and Ride I have a five-minute walk to catch the 98 B-Line, and the same when I return.

I cannot legally park at Lansdowne Shopping Centre, where there is plenty of parking space, and would be much more convenient. The alternative is to walk five minutes from my home to board the No. 3 Road bus and change at Richmond Centre to the 98 B-Line. In the reverse direction, my final stop is on Steveston Highway by the Buddhist Temple. I then have to push a button to get across. This is a hazardous crosswalk even in daylight. I would not like to use it at night.

Recently, I drove into Vancouver at 9 a.m. on a weekday. As I drove by the Park and Ride, it was not even half full. In the past this facility was very well used during the week.

Surely there is some way the 98 B-Line bus could swing by the Park and Ride to pick up and drop off passengers, and do away with the shuttle. The present bus routings are neither convenient nor time saving.

Terrorism is a criminal act

Re: “Revenge’s innocent victems,” Cultures, Sept. 16.

I am writing to express my extreme distaste for Gobinder Gill’s recent column. His thesis seems to be that if the United States and the rest of the West changed their foreign policies, then terrorist acts would be curtailed. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Mr Gill’s own examples of U.S. foreign policy show the inaccuracies of his view of history: Baghdad was only ever attacked by Western powers after several warnings and for specific reasons; Iraq was the aggressor every time. Furthermore, unlike the World Trade Center attack, the West has taken great pains to use only weaponry which would minimize the danger to civilians in the area. It would do Mr. Gill well to remember that Saddam Hussein invaded Iran and gassed his own people in the 1980s, invaded Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia with the same in the 1990s and has one of the worst human rights records of any leader in history.

It is true that U.S. foreign policy has been the cause of much undue hardship in the world. It is not, has never been, nor can be expected to be, perfect. However, it has also been the driving force behind much good in the world. As a country, it rebuilt Europe and Japan at the end of the Second World War, became the driving force behind the creation of the United Nations, has given countless billions of dollars in aid to the World community etc. The list is endless.

Given the huge disparity in power between the United States and the other nations of the world, what I find most remarkable is its restraint and goodness in dealing with other nations—not their heavy-handed duplicity. The world is surely a better place to live with the United States than without it.

The most galling part of Mr Gill’s column is its implication that a change in foreign policy would curtail terrorism. Even the most brutal foreign policy of a state does not justify the murder of innocent people. Those who are proponents of terrorism would engage in terrorist activities given any perceived injustice: whether real or not. They must not be allowed to hold the world hostage while each of their demands is met to their full satisfaction.

Terrorism is a criminal act which has the potential to destroy the very fabric of our society. Like all criminals, those who aid and abet terrorism must be punished. It is shameful that the leaders of any country would allow known terrorists to operate, under protection, from within their borders. However, it is comforting to know that, under the leadership of the U.S., a world-wide coalition is being created to ensure that justice prevails and terrorism fails.

Richmond residents show warmth and charity

To the people of Richmond:

We are all shocked by the horrific events in New York and Washington, D.C. on Sept. 11, 2001. The murder of thousands of innocent people has profoundly affected everyone I have spoken to, and will continue to affect us all for years to come.

It should be noted these senseless, cowardly acts are the acts of a few: not of a people and not of a faith. This act of terrorism which was intended to divide, has resulted in nations, peoples and institutions uniting and pulling together even more strongly than before.

Truly, you the people of Richmond have been outstanding! And I want to thank you for opening your hearts and your homes to those stranded at Vancouver International Airport as a result of the tragedy.

I want to express gratitude for your donations of time, money and even blood, during this time of international duress. Your actions are a testament to the hospitality, charity and warmth that exist in our community of Richmond.

The civilized world has been shaken, but we will rebound. I fully support action to punish those who perpetrated this heinous act, as well as those who sheltered and aided them. This was not simply an attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, but an attack on democracy, civilization and our whole way of life.

Ahead lies a time for mourning, for helping, for healing and for decisive action. The best way we can help is by standing united with our allies and friends against the forces of international terrorism. The unity that exists here in Richmond, with diverse groups working side by side in harmony is testament to the possibility of peace throughout the world. I am honoured to represent you.

We need protection in the skies

The Richmond Review editorial (“A day of horror,” Sept. 13) advocating armed personnel on airplanes is good advice, and it’s been done before.

Pilots retire at age 60, even though they are still physically fit. The airlines could hire and train then as armed guards. They could also take control of the plane if the pilots were injured.

They could use handguns loaded with cartridges containing light shot instead of solid bullets (which could penetrate the fuselage and cause decompression). A blast in the face with shot would incapacitate a terrorist.

But that still leaves the problem of the Liberal government allowing any phony “refugee” into this country. Obviously, there’s no serious screening process. All a phony refugee has to say is “I’ll be killed if I’m sent back,” and the do-gooders in the Liberal Party cave in to him.

All too human

Hopefully, the U.S. government (and other such powers) will not follow the plethora of irrational, inhumane—even with all of the innocent lives that were and will be lost in this atrocious attack against U.S. citizens—flowing freely throughout the news-media.

I would agree with the war-mongers of the West if we could somehow get all of the evil people (including those of the U.S., while we’re at it) into the same safely-isolated room, then we could perhaps morally justify U.S. ‘retaliatory’ bombings; however, that’s not how it goes, and innocents will get slaughtered in the proverbial crossfire.

Way too many innocents already intensely suffer for the deeds of the very few—e.g. millions of Iraqi children because of the sanctions against them—and to increase this immoral injustice would only fuel greater anti-U.S. sentiment, which may result in even greater terrorist attacks against innocent Americans. As human beings, we’re obliged to acknowledge all human beings as individual persons, with accompanying ideology, morals and rights.

Unfortunately, however, one of the most tragic truths of human existence is that, it seems, it requires the peaceful conduct/co-operation of literally 100 per cent of the world’s populace in order to ensure/maintain 100 per cent global stability, 100 per cent of the time.

Meanwhile, it can only take one person to cause the disintegration of global stability and then catastrophe—e.g. the assassin who triggered the expanding domino effect that eventually resulted in the brutal First World War.

Drivers should be seeing red, not amber, at crosswalks

Re: The article about the dangerous pedestrian crosswalk along Granville and Buswell (“Girl struck at intersection,” Richmond Review, Sept. 13).

We live very close to an international airport, and there are many visitors who come and go. Sometimes they rent out vehicles and drive around the city. We must not presume that everyone who drives in Richmond are locals.

It is our duty to remove all blinking amber lights, and if we want all drivers to stop, we should replace the amber with full red stop lights and make the intersection into a true pedestrian controlled intersection.

Not all drivers were taught to drive in Canada. Safety for everyone in the community is our responsibility, and obviously the drivers who do not stop simply do not respond to the amber blinking lights.

Why insist on them if it doesn’t work.

Bad drivers will be the death of us

The two “Pedestrian” articles in Thursday’s Richmond Review, miss an important point concerning pedestrian crosswalks with flashing yellow lights. It is not that many drivers ignore “new” warning lights at Granville and Buswell, rather, many drivers ignore all warning lights, regardless of the intersection at which the lights are installed, regardless of whether the lights are newly installed or installed for several years.

Case in point, similar lights have been installed at the intersection of Westminster Highway and McCallan Road for several years. Yet all pedestrians who use that crosswalk take their lives in their hands, daily.

That nobody has yet been struck is blind luck. Numerous times I have crossed that stretch of road and feared for my life and those with me. Cars and trucks routinely travel at speeds above 60 km/h yet the posted speed limit is only 50 km/h. I greatly appreciate the courteous few who stop, they are in a miniscule minority.

What you report for Granville and Buswell is routine, not extraordinary. Until such time as the City of Richmond instructs the RCMP to police these intersections vigorously, reports of pedestrians being struck will continue. Until drivers start paying attention to the rules of the road as opposed to their selfish interests, these incidents will recur.

I consider the use of flashing lights a waste of taxpayers’ money. Drivers today seem only to stop for red lights and fully functioning traffic lights are the only cost effective alternative, even if they were to cost three times as much as what is installed.

Finally, next time you decide to walk the beat, try observing the activity at stop signs—may I suggest the T-intersection of No. 1 Road and River Road? You can comfortable watch from the safety of the dike by the pumphouse. It is enlightening to watch how many people run stop signs today.

The incessant rush to get wherever we are going that few seconds sooner is going to be the death of somebody; sooner, I fear, than later.