I had a worrisome mother too. In the event you do decide to take the "chunnel" I'll pass along her advice: "be sure to wear clean underwear just in case".

MorganB - you obviously don't have children. And even though this thoughtful mother will be worried and would be better off warning her daughter of London pedestrian crossings - to look the other way - as i believe many more foreign tourists are injured or killed crossing streets in England than by terrorists, a parent's worries often defy reasonableness.

brazilnut - perhaps I shouldn't go to the US because of 4/19, 9/11, Beltway snipers...

Or if you are in Brazil perhaps I shouldn't go to a place where the murder rate is 3 times that of even the US - or 10 times that of the UK.

Patrick, did we have the same mother, lol. And do mothers ever say that anymore?

About mother's worrying, I agree. I think it comes with the instruction book.

...and here's me praying we would be able to continue carrying unlimited amount (well within reasonable range) of luggage and liquid on Eurostar!

On a more serious side, I would assume any public transportation can be a potential terror target. Having said that, do we see enhanced security measures after 7/7 on London Underground? No, aside from more noticeable metropolitan police presence.

I didn't particularly notice a stricter security check on Eurostar aside from passport control and regular x-ray (shoes and coats off, but no pat-downs) and no liquid prohibition/restriction, though my last trip was in late November.

Somehow I must have been justifying that Eurostar train is less likely to become a potential flaming bomb that can hit other targets unlike aircrafts. The only (real) incidents of fire I remember on the channel tunnel was on eurotunnel freight train, and the tunnel has a parallel service tunnel. Probably more secure than antiquated London underground. (Does anyone remember King's Cross tube fire in the late 80s?)

I have had friends die in car accidents, of cancer, of many things - but none in a terror attack.

It is horrible that people want to kill others just for retaliation, or for whatever weird reason they have. But we each take a risk each day just getting out of bed and into our cars. The Eurostar could certainly be a target, as can any hotel or anyplace else.

"Cato, do you think they can talk us out of leaving the Middle East?'

Dukey, I sure wish it was that simple. Those savage nut-jobs are bent on taking the whole world back to the 12th Century. Convert or perish is what they are after. Fighting them on thier own turf is the way to go.

&quot;I have had friends die in car accidents, of cancer, of many things - <i>but none in a terror attack.&quot;</i>

I have.

&lt;&lt;&lt; Convert or perish is what they are after. &gt;&gt;&gt;

I must be watching a different ME from the one you know - AFAIK no-one associated with the violence in the ME is interested in converting folk, they are ALL into killing the &quot;others&quot; until one side or the other gets sick of it and gives up - which will probably be a cold day in Hell

A number of us know people who had family killed in terrorist attacks - but that was in the days when being a terrorist was Kewl.

alan, having it stay in the ME would be fine by me, but it's spreading around the globe. Killing people in the name of religion is such a sick concept; best left in the 12th Century.

Perhaps we should start with all the terrorist groups with a religious basis - like the IRA,Irgun...

Again, worry about what will probably kill you:
What you eat
Not exercising
Smoking
Drinking to excess
Drinking and driving
You are MUCH more likely to win the lottery or have an eagle drop a fish on your head than you are likely to be killed by a terrorist.

Thanks 2Italy!

Now I have to worry about an eagle dropping a fish on my head!

Just when I thougt it was safe to come above ground again! Maybe the lottery winnings will soften the blow a bit.

MvK

&quot;Those savage nut-jobs are bent on taking the whole world back to the 12th Century. Convert or perish is what they are after.&quot;

- I'd be wary of accepting what politicians tell you about the motives and goals of the terrorists.

In 1969 an Australian politician visiting Vietnam stated &quot;Every soldier I spoke to believed he would be fighting the Viet Cong in Queensland if we did not stop them in Vietnam&quot;. So much for our understanding of the motives and aims of our enemies. And now we're doing it again.

&quot;Fighting them on thier own turf is the way to go.&quot;

So why didn't the US invade the countries providing most shelter for al Qaeda - Pakistan and Saudi Arabia - rather than one that wasn't?

The chunnel was a possible target in 2004, too, and I worried about it then. We took it and nothing happened, obviously, but----

Terrorism the big question mark--where, when and how. Just after 9/11 there was private and government speculation about which places in the world would be ripe for attack. The chunnel was one of them then--along with Disney World in Orlando. Lots of people in one place, and a good chance of killing people of more than one nationality to make the point.

The Channel Tunnel has always, even since before it was opened, been treated by the British and French security services as a high-risk target. That's why Eurostar trains have always had airline-style security.

That identification was probably the result of the security services sharing the preposterous exaggeration of the tunnel's commercial importance held by both governments and by many easily-duped French shareholders.

In fact there's enormous redundancy in cross-Channel links, and suspension of Channel Tunnel operations has had little significant effect on anything, except the Ford Moror Company's ability to maintain a just in time logistics system between its factories.

Fog, French air traffic disputes or plain over-reaction to an aviation security threat cause far, far more disruption. There's no alternative to a plane if you want to go shopping in New York or get your Ryanair cheapo weekend in Marbella.

I'm just a little non-violent girl from the Midwest, and I thought within days of Sept. 11 that the Chunnel would make a prime target - just like the Golden Gate bridge, the Sears Tower, the British Museum, the Vatican, the Brooklyn Bridge, and every plane in the sky...

If I can figure that out, surely the terrorists did too - back in 2001, if not before.

It's just not a new threat.

(I threw caution to the wind and took the Channel tunnel from London to Paris five months after the WTC attacks - it was a fun part of our trip and I'd do it again tomorrow if I could.)

Life <i> is </i> risk.

PalB: The US is a target. Perhaps the concerned mothers of the US should send all of their children to Swiss boarding schools?

As others have mentioned the channel tunnel has been a target since it opened. So has any other high profile mode of transportation or structure in the western world. It is sadly a fact of life these days. Standing around yelling fire does not move the situation forward.

Go on with life and live it to the fullest. You simply cannot avoid a random act of terror or for that matter, natural disaster or any situation that threatens lives.

Give her a break. She's a mum. Mum's worry. It's the job description.

If I were about to travel through the tunnel myself I wouldn't be worried at all and would just think 'sod'em' as you can't let terrorists scare you off things.

If my son were about to travel through the tunnel, I wouldn't try to stop him, but yes I couldn't help but worry until I knew he was through safely. Your own kids are different somehow!