War.... (Historical: 9/11 discussion thread) [Archive]

Puke

September 11th, 2001, 07:15 PM

just got this. thought it was 'cute.'

To: tech-contact.asia@ns.above.net; tech-contact.europe@ns.above.net; tech-contact.usa@ns.above.net
Subject: Security in MFN Facilities Cc:
Dear Valued Customer,

As you are probably aware, there have been several incidents today which appear to be terrorism related. This has caused a heightened state of alert across the country.

MFN�s Security Team is evaluating the issues surrounding these latest events and our customers should expect heightened security measures at our facilities until further notice. There are no threats specifically directed towards MFN, any or its subsidiaries or any of its properties.

These are some of the measures you can expect:

1. MFN will explain to all persons entering the building that we are in a heightened state of alert and readiness.
2. All doors will be locked down 24x7.
3. All IDs will be visually compared with the bearer upon entering the building.
4. All packages and equipment will be screened.
5. Customers may be asked about the purpose of their visit.

We ask that customers observing anything that would appear out of the ordinary to please contact MFN staff immediately. We appreciate your patience during this challenging time.

As with all technical contacts, if you have any questions
concerning this email, please contact our 24/7 Call Center at (877)ISXPERT (877-479-7378) or locally at (408)350-6451 or via email at
service@above.net.

Thank you,

MFN Corporate Communications

Note: If you have received this mail in error or wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send your request to service@above.net.

September 11th, 2001, 07:22 PM

customers observing anything that would appear out of the ordinary

Yeah.

I do admit that I am reasonably intelligent even when not "inspired" if that is the proper word. As I mentioned repeatedly before, I do not necessarily get out of the computer keyboard what I type in, and the page is often changed by the time I get to the bottom. I eventually had enough sense to stop fighting it and just let it do whatever it wanted. This reduced the disorientation significantly.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

September 11th, 2001, 07:29 PM

The tune was Yellow Rose of Texas.
It is now Yankee Doodle Dandy.

Ha Ha

Lonnie Courtney Clay

September 11th, 2001, 07:34 PM

Back to Yellow Rose of Texas.
I suppose that means that as a Christian President Bush should be trusted.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

Sinapus

September 11th, 2001, 07:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by LCC:
what war ? where ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

More like "act of war".

------------------
--
"What do -you- want?" "I'd like to live -just- long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave like this..." *waggle* "...can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?"

September 11th, 2001, 07:36 PM

Laugh while you can, better check to see who is drawing your own cartoon strip.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

September 11th, 2001, 07:52 PM

Does Anyone have a midi file link for GOD BLESS AMERICA ?

Lonnie Courtney Clay

Joss21

September 11th, 2001, 07:54 PM

My godness...

THAT is what i call terrorism. What a bunch of F@ckers...
I heard an TV that may be 35000 people was inside the towers... thousands of deaths..
My condolencies to US people...

And I was planning to pass christmas in NY...

------------------
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down tho their level, then beat you with experience".

September 11th, 2001, 08:01 PM

All religions agree on the following :
1) Humans have souls
2) Souls are judged at death
3) what happens next depends on the judgement

I do not recall precisely what that horoscope said, but I have to pay like this for something I did before. I do not know what religion I followed before, but whatever it was, I should have believed in Valhalla rather than reincarnation.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

September 11th, 2001, 08:08 PM

That is not an endorsement of the Norse religion, just an observation that what your judgement may be depends upon the judge.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

Mephisto

September 11th, 2001, 08:11 PM

I�m shocked by this barbaric act of terrorism! My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and the families of the victims. My respect goes to the brave men and women of the emergency services who risked (and lost?) there lives while they went in where others were running from. They are true heroes.

Frankfurt, Germany

P.S.: Update: 8 pm local time, all church bells in my country are ringing in memory of the victims...

[This message has been edited by [K126]Mephisto (edited 11 September 2001).]

September 11th, 2001, 08:14 PM

If you believe that there is one and only one GOD then you had better be prepared for judgement by the rules of your GOD.

There have always been multiple religions. It is best to leave the business of GOD up to GOD and not attempt to meddle in GOD's affairs.

Lonnie Courtney Clay

September 11th, 2001, 08:25 PM

http://www.basecamp.cnchost.com/vetview.htm

Lonnie Courtney Clay

disabled

September 11th, 2001, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by LCC:
I suggest that you simply do not believe it. The media is full of misinformation all the time. I saw that long ago.

Lonnie Courtney ClayLCC, do everyone a favor and have a nice big ole' cup of SHUT THE F@CK UP!

[ June 13, 2003, 06:57: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Deathstalker

September 11th, 2001, 08:55 PM

My God, all I want to do is wake up.......this can't be real.....

on an off note the one thing that struck me in the tv pictures is that cars and buses were still running, still going somewhere....here (in my city) the garbage is still picked up on time, etc...how can anybody be doing anything remotely normal in the face of something so horrible is kinda strange (as is my posting I guess....)

Even though I am a confirmed agnostic/deist my prayers go with all the families/people who are offended..

(Deathstalker.....wishing there was a real superman to save the day....)

rdouglass

September 11th, 2001, 08:56 PM

A pretty good link that gets updated about every 15 minutes:
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/index.html

disabled

September 11th, 2001, 08:59 PM

Of all the things....

I watched a replay on ABC of the people running...

a NYC cop: "MAKE A ****ING HOLE"

Just another first on local tv...

[ June 13, 2003, 06:56: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

capnq

September 11th, 2001, 09:13 PM

< heavy sigh >

Sometimes being a cynical pessimist is an advantage.

The only thing that surprised me about today's news was the amount of coordination shown in pulling off so many attacks in such a short time period. Terrorism experts have been predicting that this could happen for years.

I turned off the news coverage when they got to the talking heads propounding What Should Be Done Now, and the man-in-the-street reactions.

"Rumors will be spreading today like mildew in a damp basement." - Dan Rather

Puke

September 11th, 2001, 09:18 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Deathstalker:
...how can anybody be doing anything remotely normal in the face of something so horrible is kinda strange <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

not to do so would be to give in to terrorism.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Joss21:
And I was planning to pass christmas in NY...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I hope this does not change your plans.

Lemmy

September 11th, 2001, 09:19 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Hadrian Aventine:
So far, I have gathered that it was a 757 or 767 that hit the Pentagon and the same on the Trade Towers...

New York... It looks shorter...

John McCain has said that he'll support a Full Declaration of War aganist the patron country of this attack.

Personally, I think the US needs to pull together and takes these Sons'a'*****es out.

On top of that, REBUILD the Trade Towers.

Screw them fanatics, we need to rebuild and retalliate.

Sadly.. I don't think bush is up to it...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i'm think that Bush is up to it...and even more, that's what i'm afraid of
Either way, i agree that this can't go unpunished.

Tim Brooks

September 11th, 2001, 09:20 PM

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/

------------------
Tim Brooks
Shrapnel Games

disabled

September 11th, 2001, 09:22 PM

Hell yes man!

[ June 13, 2003, 06:58: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

LazarusLong42

September 11th, 2001, 09:34 PM

I just had a somewhat sickening thought. What if this is just a diVersion? I think we've all heard of the scenario in which a vial of anthrax is dropped in front of a subway train...

The problem with spending time writing spec fiction is you can scare yourself way too easily.

LL

disabled

September 11th, 2001, 09:44 PM

Excuse me if this is rude, but biological warfare and such is Tom Clancy "If" items.

If anything, I feel more attacks will happen all over.

This isn't over.

[ June 13, 2003, 06:59: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Puke

September 11th, 2001, 10:15 PM

nope, not over yet. to quote, 'we have not yet begun to fight.' this wont be over until we nail some heads on pikes. The attacks, however, have most likely wained.

this tho, is something for thought:
http://vatican.rotten.com/wtc-smoke/

edit: speaking of tom clancy, cnn is linking to some interview with him and citing him as an authority on terrorist's orginizational logistics. no wonder people condenm western culture.

[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 11 September 2001).]

Mudshark

September 11th, 2001, 11:27 PM

The sad thing about this attack on U.S. soil is that 99.9% of the people in the world are content with raising a family, making love with their significant other, basically getting on with their lives. The retrobutions will be great, as they have to be! Until the religoius ziolots of the world can understand tolerence (as preached in all major religious teachings)we should not let our gaurd down, and do whatever we can to stamp out this blight on what is pretty much a somewhat sane society. This has angered the sleeping giant to its very core! The retrobutions will shake this planet to its core, what else can the United States do? Terrorists must be somehow be eliminated! Hopefully We (the US) will take an enlightened view. If not I would not want to live in the country responsibe for the finance or this act!! I cannot see the United states sitting idly, emotions are running way too high

Suicide Junkie

September 11th, 2001, 11:50 PM

Anybody know what's up with the explosions in Kabul, Afganistan? CNN showed a building on fire.

Puke

September 11th, 2001, 11:51 PM

oh - my - god

i just heard that someone made a phonecall to one of the planes while it was being hijacked. the person on board described the attackers as having knife like instruments. im sorry, but i am saddend to be an american at this time. what the **** is up with that? over a hundred people on those planes, and not a single one of them with enough balls to pickup their flotation cution and overpower someone wielding a knife like instrument? how many of them could there have been? people are sheep, i swear its true.

and where the hell are these illedged 'air cops' that are supposed to be on every flight with a gun? not one plane had an air cop on it? or are you telling me that a guy with a gun cant contend with people wielding knife like instruments?

tesco samoa

September 11th, 2001, 11:52 PM

those explosions are cruise missle attacks

tesco samoa

September 11th, 2001, 11:57 PM

If your having trouble getting to news sites go to the washington post or Slashdot.

They have been working all day.

disabled

September 12th, 2001, 12:06 AM

Those were not knifes. They was most likely islamic swords, the name escapes me. I just called the hindu temple and some relatives down the street, they are ready to enlist and go to war.

The attacks are on the taliban government in Kabal Afgahnistan. Most likely a US or US-allied attack. This is what they get for giving shelter to terrorist.

[ June 13, 2003, 07:00: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

disabled

September 12th, 2001, 12:11 AM

I just got word that 20-30 senators are in favor of a declaration of war against the patron nations

[ June 13, 2003, 07:00: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Argh

September 12th, 2001, 12:16 AM

Well, gas prices all over the nation have more than doubled. Damn profiteering jerks!

As for the who/what/where . . . once again, we're almost 100% likely to be dealing with people who hail no nation as a home base.

The sad part about this sort of attack is that while we can(and will) find the people who did this, we'll never have just revenge, because jailing or killing a few fanatic psychopaths will never really solve the inherent problem, which is that we have no wish to go to war in the Middle East over land that's marginally useful(other than the oil). Moreover, our greatest potential enemy, Russia, has her fingers soaked with blood and lost treasure, and might go to war with us if we got really serious about clearing the muddy ground.

The world is a dangerous place, because while the concept of Empire has vanished, whilst each of the old imperial powers still continue to excercise their authority through blackmail, monetary policy, and the occasional proxy war. This attack is one of the results.

As much as I would like to join in the bloodthirsty cheering for revenge, therefore. . . I can't. We need to make some very hard choices- or just find the isolated scumbags, lock them away, and complacently wait until the next time. . .

Joss21

September 12th, 2001, 12:30 AM

I just can�t believe what i�m seeing in CNN...

As far as i know, Bin Laden, supposed leader of the terrorists, is refugiated in Afghanistan.
But, instead of waiting one or two days for the American intelligence to find out where he is, and drop a bomb over his head, this crazy lunatic of Bush is bombarding the Capital city...

I thought Palestinian people were responsible for this... not Afghanistan
At least who were celebrating were the palestinians

That make US no better than the terrorists...
Its only a game of "I hit you because I�m greater than you, and you can�t fight back"

Please stop Bush. Is totally crazy.

LazarusLong42

September 12th, 2001, 12:36 AM

Actually, AP is reporting that a US Defense official (speaking anonymously of course) indicated that we aren't the ones doing the bombing.

Whether that's _true_ or not we have yet to see. But the general consensus appears to be that bin Laden is involved.

As to determining where is is... the Afghan Taliban government allows him asylum. That makes them just as culpable. Therefore glassing them is justified.

LL

thorfrog

September 12th, 2001, 12:49 AM

Down with all radical muslim nations. Glass them all to the stoneage. Afganistan shall feel the wrath of the eagle.

Antonin

September 12th, 2001, 12:54 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Joss21:
As far as i know, Bin Laden, supposed leader of the terrorists, is refugiated in Afghanistan.

It is too early to say who is responsible. At this point, some Groups that didn't do it will be claiming responsibility because they wish they had done it. And some Groups that didn't do it may be claiming credit on behalf of Groups they are at odds with, hoping to get their enemies blamed, and retaliated against.

I thought Palestinian people were responsible for this... not Afghanistan
At least who were celebrating were the palestinians

It's very important to remember that Arabs are not all the same. Palestinians are not all the same. Not every Palestinian is a terrorist. Not every Palestinian is anti-US, and even most of the ones that are, separate their hatred of the US government from a basic respect for the US people.

Some are celebrating this grotesque tragedy, but they are not the ones responsible for the crime. They celebrate because it is a strike against the US and US power. The US has supported Israel's brutal 34-year military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinian who you see celebrating on TV news is doing so because the Israeli bulldozer that demolished his sister's home Last week was paid for with money handed over by the US government. It is a matter of saying "now the Americans know what it is to suffer, as we do." It's wrong, but that's the way it is.

That make US no better than the terrorists...
Its only a game of "I hit you because I�m greater than you, and you can�t fight back"

That is always the policy of strong nations. Many people in the US, as they mourn this tragedy, will not see the context in which such actions take place. They will blame "the Palestinians" and that will be that.

There are many Groups in the world that hate US power, and some of them have very legitimate reasons for that, even if their methods of fighting US power are the methods of cowards.

I heard comments by one American man-on-the-street about word that the DFLP may have been responsible. He then started raging about Arafat, without realizing that the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine is not the PLO, is not Arafat's group, and in fact is opposed completely to the two-state solution Arafat has been seeking since the early 1990s. Most of the competing Palestinian Groups hate each other, and would kill each other's leaders if they could.

Most Americans, unfortunately, know little of the effects of their government's policies abroad. They make little effort to understand other countries and other people. The same Americans who claim to have a deep, basic mistrust of their own government nearly always believe whatever their government has to say concerning national security matters, or matters of war and peace. It's sad.

Punish the guilty. But do not single out a race or a nationality or a religion for hatred.

Please stop Bush. Is totally crazy.

He's not crazy, merely dumb. This gives him a chance to play President.

But still, he has to do something. The guilty have to be punished.

To all: I have kept my remarks in this post civil. Please remain civil in your flames.

[This message has been edited by Natsef-Amun (edited 11 September 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Natsef-Amun (edited 12 September 2001).]

Joss21

September 12th, 2001, 01:04 AM

You may be right, Lazarus..

But this doesn�t help to the image of magnanimous gentlemens you like to believe you are...

Don�t take me wrong... I would like to do the same if I were US citizen.
I just don�t like americans that says "i�m full of morality" "we are the good guys" "we are the policeman of the world" and then when someone hits them react like an angry teenager, "you hurt my interests, then i will destrou you".

Just what i think....
Bush just should wait until there is enough certainty of say, palestine have to do with it, and just then level-off the country.

But now, just sound like the government just tried to change the news banners of "USA under attack" for "USA counterattacks" just to calm down people.

I�m in Argentina, and i know this situation will hurt all the world economy, including our "third world" developing countries.

I just doesn�t share what you are doing.

Joss21

September 12th, 2001, 01:13 AM

I totally concord with Natsef-Amun

His toughts are very insightful.

Its very visible for us non-americans that the average american citizen dont have idea of the rest of the world around they is doing...

LazarusLong42

September 12th, 2001, 02:07 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Joss21:
I just don�t like americans that says "i�m full of morality" "we are the good guys" "we are the policeman of the world" and then when someone hits them react like an angry teenager, "you hurt my interests, then i will destrou you".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A few things:

1. As I said, we're not bombing anyone yet. Remember that Afghanistan is undergoing a civil war still. As far as anyone can tell right now, they're bombing themselves (or each other, as the case may be called).

2. What do the police and the good guys do in movies, guys? As soon as the bad guys do somethign evil... they go after them. Bombing Afghanistan--if bin Laden and/or the Taliban are, in fact, the culprits--is a proportional, direct, and correct response.

Note: That's _if_ they're culpable. Also, I don't believe the Palestinians are culpable here--there've been no signs they are. They're just celebrating it.

LL

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 02:11 AM

While I am in agreement with Natsef-Amun as well, I think that some of the basics about human nature are being overlooked.

Idealy, it would be very nice indeed to look at each person as an individual and make judgements accordingly. This is not always practical though. I think it is perticularly poignent that the EU is in the process for apologozing for imperalism, when it is the absense of imperalism that empowers decentralized forces to commit acts like this.

When world powers can be attacked without any nation taking responsibility, how can there be reprisal? Without reperations, how can there be a return to order without a threat of recurrance? So it is logical for people to dislike and blame those Groups whom express hatred for your own political ideas and culture. And it is unfortunate that innocent individuals get lumped into those Groups.

In general, US forign policy benefits the US people. If not the people, then it benefits US industry or commerce, which in turn benefits our people. It is a blanket generization (which you just got done condenming) to say that the average US citizen is ignorant of the impact of our forign policy. We are not ignorant, we merely support what anti-globalists call American-Imperialism. We know full well our policies are disrupting the well being of others, but at the same time they benefit our alies, and in turn benefit us.

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 02:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by LazarusLong42:
Note: That's _if_ they're culpable. Also, I don't believe the Palestinians are culpable here--there've been no signs they are. They're just celebrating it.

LL

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No kidding. I might not like them, but we screwed them over, and if I were them, Id be celebrating too. Its pretty darn silly to think they had anything to do with it. If they had that kind of resources, you think they would hit Israel.

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 02:55 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Hadrian Aventine:
Those were not knifes. They was most likely islamic swords, the name escapes me<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Ted Olson told CNN that his wife said all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers. The only weapons she mentioned were knives and cardboard cutters.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

sorry for the multiple Posts, but: swords my ***. how the hell is someone going to get a sword past airport security? even on a domestic flight. I get enough crap about the EYELETS on my BOOTS. we're a nation of fat, spineless, sheep. I would have at least given them enough credit to have used shanks the size of a shoe sole, but BOX CUTTERS?! give me a break!

as a side note, would that not really screw with the weight distribution of the plane to put all those people in the back? (especially if they are fat americans?) didnt some female pop singer just die on takeoff because her pilot didnt properly distribute the load of the aircraft?

disabled

September 12th, 2001, 03:27 AM

I'm stunned at the failure of airport security.

I'm equally stunned at the fact we didn't see this coming.

I know that congress will hold joint session in the morning with any luck. Then we shall see if the Federal Union will previal.

[ June 13, 2003, 07:01: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

geoschmo

September 12th, 2001, 03:47 AM

Puke, keep in mind the people on the planes likely did not know what the terrorists had planned, until it was too late. This was totally unprecedented.

If you put yourself in the mind of the passangers and crew onboard, you are flying in an airplane with obviously unstable individuals in charge. They no douubt expected the plane to be landed somewhere and demands made, and eventually they would be freed. That's how it normally happens. But today the rules changed. Today the world changed. But the people onboard the planes couldn't know that at the time.

In fact we may find out that the reason the fourth plane crashed in penn. is because the passengers discovered via radio or cell phone what was going on and decided to rush the terrorists.

The people on board weren't sheep. They were scared. And they assumed the terrorists didn't want to die. Most people don't.

Geoschmo

Kadste

September 12th, 2001, 03:57 AM

This is the most incredible event of my life, hell all of our lives! I am Canadian, but I work a lot in the US and I have many friends and relatives there and I still feel like it is some terrible nightmare. My heart is burdened with the extreme loss suffered by our best friends. There are no two countries in the world like us. We share so many common interests, beliefs and feelings that sometimes you cannot tell us apart. When I travel to the States, one of the biggest compliments that I receive is blending in. I feel at home in the States, just like in Canada. It is my second home.

Reasonable people do not do this. The cowardly bastards who did this will probably not have the balls to even admit it. It is one thing to make war against a countries military, but to attack innocent civilians is the lowest, most despicable act anyone could perpetuate.

Terrorism has been with us for many centuries and we have learned that it solves nothing. Acts like this against anyone is not acceptable and must be punished.

Most people will regard this as an act of terrorism. But is was not. It was an act of war. And as such, it must be treated as such.

Democracies like the US are very susceptible to acts like this. In a FREE country, individual freedoms and rights are fundamental. The dangers to a free country have always been balanced in favor of the individual rights and individual freedoms and as such an act like this can and obviously did happen. What will change now? Are we prepared to make the necessary changes to protect us against another act?

I travel through many airports throughout North America very frequently. While security is generally good, it is not as good as in countries that have suffered. In Canada, some leeway is given to members of religious sects to carry their ceremonial daggers on Canadian flights. I wonder if this the same in the US? The weapons were probably a the size of a knife, anything larger would be detected.

It is very hard for me to express myself now, my emotions are getting the better of me.

My heart goes out to all Americans,

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

disabled

September 12th, 2001, 03:57 AM

I hope their deaths don't go unrepaid by the full might of the combined forces of the United States.

[ June 13, 2003, 07:02: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Lord Kodos

September 12th, 2001, 04:02 AM

im from new york... my prayers for all who died in this terrible stupid attack i hope they all are punished by the fury of the sleeper

------------------
Some rule some serve
some declare wars some
fight them
i declare wars i rule
you serve you fight
wars.....
we are not the same.....
never forget that..

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 04:05 AM

post deleted. i should pick my fights, and this is the wrong one at the wrong time. I will have to agree to disagree with Geo on this one.

indeed, this is a day that future generations will ask us about when they talk about it in school. That, and the Berlin wall. Well, for me anyhow. Those of you who lived thru Korea and Viet Nam might have a few more stories to tell.

[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 12 September 2001).]

DocShane

September 12th, 2001, 05:07 AM

I got on PBW just to escape the day and return to some level of normalcy. I couldn't resist reading this posting, however. It has to be the largest number of Posts in a single day on a single topic on Shrapnel.

Someone on TV compared this to Pearl Harbor. It is an inciting event, but much bigger than that. Pearl Harbor was a vicious attack on our military at an off-mainland base. 2,300 died. We anticipated we would eventually be at war with Japan, we just wanted to stay out of it as long as possible. What happened today was magnitudes larger. It was a direct attack on civilians on our mainland. Probably in large excess of 23,000 died. We have been engaged in diplomacy with various nations plagued by terrorism, just wanting to remain distanced. In both cases, they awoke a great sleeping beast.

As a physician, I agree with Hadrian and Lazarus. I do not want to be alarmist but this may only be a prelude of things to come. The perpetrators of this trajedy are probably also able to instigate biological terrorism. This is an indiscriminate killer of many more, even those of us seeming protected in the heartland of America. The military is prepared to defend themselves against such a threat, yet there is no good defense nor adequate preparedness among the civilian population. The weapons of choice would be anthrax, smallpox, plague, botulism, E coli, salmonella, cholera, and Ebola. The mechanisms to deliver it to the population are varied: aerosolized sprays, contaminated water, tainted food, infected human carriers. By the time it is recognized, the population will be widely infected and many dead.

May the dead and those family members who have lost or are missing loved ones find some peace in the face of this unprecedented trajedy. May God strengthen and repair our broken spirit. It is to all Americans affected by this disaster that I dedicate my signature:

------------------
The Good Doc

"Henceforth I spread confident wings to space
I fear no barrier of crystal or glass;
I cleave the heavens and soar to the infinite.
And while I rise from my own globe to others
And penetrate even further through the eternal field,
That which others saw from afar, I leave far behind me."

-Giordano Bruno
"On the Infinite Universe and Worlds," 1584

Phoenix-D

September 12th, 2001, 05:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>how the hell is someone going to get a sword past airport security<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very easily. Ever been strip-searched? Didn't think so. So tape it to yourself. What about the metal detectors, you ask? Proper material, they won't be set off. (a knife or very short sword.. or gun.. is more likey).

Second, why didn't they do anything? Well, they didn't want to die, and they more than likely has no idea what was about to happen.

Phoenix-D

Phoenix-D

September 12th, 2001, 05:50 AM

This is friggin sick.
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/store/productdetail.aspx?prodno=1468594&zoom=yes

In case someone gets an attack of sense, what this is is a t-shirt.

On the front:
"I crashed a plane into the world trade center"
On the back:
"and all I got was this lousy t-shirt."

Phoenix-D

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 05:55 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
Very easily. Ever been strip-searched? Didn't think so.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

no, but im patted down quite often. it might just be flattery for my nice ***, but i think its because airport security is fairly vigilant. I think it would be MUCH easier just to conceal a broad, flexible, 7 inch blade in the sole of your shoe. as long as you had eyelets or buckles or steeltoes or something to blame it on, i dont think you would have a problem at all.

a gun would be quite the trick though. it would need to be a single shot weapon, homemade, and you would need to carry the bullets in something seperate like your wallet that you could drop in the tray and not have scanned. even with a gun, i think you could only count on getting one shot off. i would hate to be embarassed by a misfire with my only shot, and on a holy crusade that kind of embarasment would be relly bad.

maybe they could have a bunch of people come thru with gun parts and then the guy with the ticket could assemble them in the bathroom and stuff it in his carry-on after he is thru security. If i stripped my automatic down to component parts, the only thing that would be recognized by the xray technicians would be the lower reciever. and i think i could fix that with a saw, a bracket, and a couple bolts. that or use something with a carbon fiber lower so you can conceal it on your person, and re-attach it to the upper on the other side.

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 05:59 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Phoenix-D:
This is friggin sick.
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/store/productdetail.aspx?prodno=1468594&zoom=yes
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well, that didnt take long. on the one hand, i am apauled by the banality of our culture. on the other hand, i remember the 'i survived the terror in the towers' shirts from '93, and i think its good that people are able to recover and make light of the situation. it is indeed tragic, but the markets must open, and people must attend, or we really are victims of terror.

Quikngruvn

September 12th, 2001, 07:15 AM

Some points to ponder.

Supposedly someone close to Osama bin Laden told a European (British?) newspaper three weeks ago that bin Laden was going to do something big and bad to the US.

My boss at work has been reading Nostradamus and has concluded that bin Laden, not Saddam Hussein, is the third Antichrist (after Napoleon and Hitler).

(There's also a $5 million dollar bounty on his head, but my guess is it will take more than $5 million to catch him.)

Note the weapon of choice in these attacks: American planes to destroy American lives. Kinda like ripping your arm off and beating you to death with it.

Reading on the internet this afternoon, every single nation's government that I saw had responded expressed sorrow, shock, horror, etc. at this act, including Yassar Arafat and the Taliban in Afghanistan. The only responses not condemning the attack were from some militant Muslim sects.

('Course, the cynic in me takes some of those responses with a grain of salt. The Taliban may just be trying to divert attention away from themselves as the next logical target. But the idealist in me, bruised though it is this day, still believes in the basic goodness of humanity.)

And I know that not all Muslims are extremists. But I will never understand what would drive someone to do such an act.

The dead and missing, at Last count:
260 airline passengers and crews
300 NYC firefighters
80 NYC policemen
800 Pentagon employees
and God knows how many in and around the WTC

But, by God, there are people still alive under all that rubble!

What to do with the site now? I had thought of a memorial, a la Oklahoma City. But my wife pointed out that that is prime real estate, and it would be a much bigger 'Screw you' if the WTC were rebuilt.

I apologize for the disjointed stream of conciousness in this post. My mind is still reeling-- at the images of the planes crashing into the WTC (CNN just showed a home video of the FIRST plane crashing), at the idea of a national landmark collapsing in ruins, at the idea of thousands of people dying because of the irrational thought process of a small number of individuals... and at the war that the US has suddenly found itself in. (I say suddenly, but I think we all knew that this day was coming-- just maybe not of such magnitude.) All I can do right now is keep on keeping on. But I have said a prayer for the victims, their families, and the brave men and women who put themselves in harm's way trying to rescue the victims. And I almost never pray, heathen that I am.

Quikngruvn, still in shock

CNCRaymond

September 12th, 2001, 07:32 AM

As I am new here, I will try and keep my post small.

What transpired today, the horror of senseless terrorism against innocent people, has now become the poster for Islam. No matter who follows that religion, they will forever be known as murders and terrorists.

This is regrettable in that there are many millions of Islamic followers that would never harm any one and now must bare the stigma of what a few have done in the name of Islam.

My heart goes out to those people, and indeed to the victims of today's evil, and I would hope and pray that somehow, in some small way, people can find it in their hearts not to blame all of Islam for the acts of these cowards.

HiveLordJim

September 12th, 2001, 08:47 AM

You gotta hate people who bomb innocent civilians.

This has to be the worst act of terrorism since the U.S. detonated atomic bombs on innocent civilians.

I certainly hope people like that pay for their evil acts.

dogscoff

September 12th, 2001, 10:09 AM

I am deeply saddened by this horrible event. Driving home from work yesterday there were tears in my eyes at the reports of desperate ppl jumping to their deaths to escape the disaster area.

The important thing now is what the US government does next. There has been plenty of macho posturing and tough talk about revenge. This is not only ineffectual, but cheap and deeply disrespectful to the casualties of the disaster. What is needed is justice and an end to the hatred. Remember that justice and revenge are two entirely different things.

Cheap gestures to appease an angry public (ie randomly blowing stuff up in the middle east) would not do anything to eliminate or pacify the terrorist Groups invloved. The anger of the people must *not* be reflected in the actions of the government.

I'm not saying sit back and do nothing, but pick your targts carefully, and do not stoop to the brutal standards of the enemy. Act according to logic, reason and conmpassion rather than for emotion or public relations. To do otherwise would a step in the direction of mob rule and anarchy- the opposite of democracy.

Of course the US has officially denied involvement in the Afghanistani bombings. I hope that this denial is true, and that future actions will be well informed and carefully calculated operations.

Somehow I don't think my hopes will be realised.

EDIT: I also want to support the earlier post about Islam. The Islamic religion advocates peace and tolerance. Unfortunatly, it has been twistd into a weapon by certain Groups, just as Christianity was abused countless times to justify appalling things like the crusades or the spanish inquisition. Don't hate Muslims for this.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

[This message has been edited by dogscoff (edited 12 September 2001).]

dumbluck

September 12th, 2001, 12:10 PM

With all due respect to the countless victims at the WTC, I think that the Pentagon attack is more important. The reason for this is that the Pentagon is a US _MILITARY_ installation. Using aircraft in a kamakazi role changes them from a vehicle designation to a weapon. Firing a weapon against a Military installation is AN ACT OF WAR according to the Geneva Convention (I think it was the GC, anyway). Granted, the culprit (alleged) is an individual, not a country, and a nation-state cannot wage war against an individual. However, said individual is being _knowingly_ harbored and protected by a nation-state, which in my eyes makes the nation-state culpable as well. And war CAN be declared on a nation-state, as we all know.

Note: I am not saying this is a good thing; in fact, just the opposite. A paraphrased quote from a movie (cant remember the name) sums it up best, I think: "Here and now, in the nuclear age, the real enemy is not a nation, but war itself." So the question is: does President Bush hold a similar view, or will the US get into ANOTHER armed conflict/war? From what I've heard, he and I are not of a like mind. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif

One final note (and favorite phrase from a book): The terrorists think that god is on their side. For their sake, I hope so, because they have angered a sleeping giant, and all the "power and rage of this country" shall be turned against these misguided souls. They got in a good second punch; unfortunately they are the 120 lb fighter who caught the heavyweight champion in the chin with that second punch.

[This message has been edited by dumbluck (edited 12 September 2001).]

rdouglass

September 12th, 2001, 02:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
...In fact we may find out that the reason the fourth plane crashed in penn. is because the passengers discovered via radio or cell phone what was going on and decided to rush the terrorists.

The people on board weren't sheep. They were scared. And they assumed the terrorists didn't want to die. Most people don't.

Geoschmo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to news reports this morning, a man on that 4th plane called his wife and told her he loved her and was going to die 'c ause him and a few other passengers were going to rush the terrorists. Also, same report said that the plane was suspected to be heading to Washington DC instead of Camp David as originally reported.

I agree also that the people on the other plane probably did not realize it was a suicide mission. Most (not all of course) hijacking you hear about ends with the plane landing at another airport in another country
and someone usually negotiates for SOMETHING.

Lastly, its very easy to play 'armchair quarterback' and unless you're actually there faced with the actual circumstances, its impossible to predict what you actually would do. I am by no means saying that everyone did everything they possibly could, I'm just saying its difficult to predict what one would do faced with impending death untill you're actually facing it.

Reguardless, this was a terrible event for the world, not just the U.S. Of course, the world is really rather small and not everyone is going to 'get along' with everyone else. I don't know the answers, but we have all seen the problems.......

Stone Mill

September 12th, 2001, 03:41 PM

We are all shaken and disturbed by this. But the feeling of the day seems to be helpless.

Two fears:
1. A general association with Islam and terrorism by those less educated. A have heard remarks that here in the US: "we should beat down some towelheads at the gas station." Need I point out how ignorant this sounds? Is it not obvios that all Muslims are not terrorists?
If we nuke Middle Eastern nations, et al, do we weed out their US relatives and exterminate them as well?

2. Terrorists are not easily detected. I'm sure someone will pay the price for this attack but it may not be the parties responsible. Those of us who are so angry (that we want to vomit) cry for bloodshed, punishment and retribution. But we are the victims of too many Harrison Ford movies. In real life, these Groups are as crafty and intelligent as we are- and they go the extra step to dedicate and willingly give their life for their cause.

This is something unprecendented- not the act of a nation or reasonable leader we can declare war against- but the monstrous actions of a secret society. Our successful infiltration of these factions has been either poor or negligible. Our satelletites and survellience equipment master the topography, but these terrorists are masters of the underground.

The answer here is quite a bit more complicated.

geoschmo

September 12th, 2001, 04:25 PM

I do not support attacks against Arab Americans in "retaliation" for what happened yesterday. Anybody supporting that would be as ignorant and evil as the people who perpetrated this act.

Not all Islamic people are terrorists. In fact no true follower of Islam could support the taking of an innocent life.

That being said I am sickened and outraged by the images of Palestinian people dancing and celebrating these attacks.

Regardless of American support for Israel, nobody has EVER seen footage of Americans dancing in the street when Israeli soldiers kill Palestinians. In fact I have never seen footage of Israeli citizens celebrating in the streets over the loss of Palestinian lives. What they usually do is feel sorrow over the tragic loss of life on both sides.

Don't try and tell me it's justified because of the actions of the Israelis or the Americans supporting them.

What kind of society can celebrate the horrendous acts of terrorism that took place yesterday?

What kind of sick person can take pleasure in the suffering of another person, even someone who is your enemy?

I don't understand. I never will.

Geoschmo

Hotfoot

September 12th, 2001, 04:39 PM

Yesterday on my college campus, people were already giving Middle Eastern students dirty looks. It's sad, especially on a liberal arts campus like Sarah Lawrence.

Hopefully people here have come to their senses, and I wish people everywhere would. An eye for an eye just doesn't work anymore, it only leads into a downwards spiral.

As it stands now, however, from what I've heard (and this is not official or being talked about on the news, so take it with a grain of salt), over 2/3 of America's entire military is mobilized for action, the nation is at DEFCON 3, and the reason for skyrocketing oil and gas prices within the past 24 hours is due to it being requisitioned for military use.

Looks like the Chinese finally got us. We are living in interesting times indeed.

Argh

September 12th, 2001, 05:53 PM

The Taliban(whose 'government' is the prime suspect, as they're harboring Osama Bin Ladin) are, in a very real sense, our monster. We created the Taliban as a fanatical nationalistic and religious group, to defeat the Soviets. We trained them. We armed them. And we turned a blind eye to their excesses.

We(and the retreating Soviets) left behind an arsenal that's totally out of proportion with the size of the country. And then we're surprised that these well-armed, battle-scarred religious fanatics have resisted all calls to moderate their ways? Please. . .

Our problem here is a fundamental one- we have a philosophical conflict with the radical Islamists, who :

1. Realize that liberal Western ways are infinately more fun than their way of life, and will steadily corrupt and disrupt their carefully-constructed societies.

2. Have seen what happens to other traditional societies when Western ideas begin to dismantle the traditional social order- chaos, disorder, and ultimately the removal of non-progressive leadership ensue, and that's not something that any authoritarian appreciates. Note China, North Korea, and Vietnam's longstanding war against Western ideas. China has struck a delicate balance between the iron fist and open arms, but they often fire up their hatred machinery in order to keep themselves firmly in control of national politics. For that matter, so does our government.

3. Noticed that most societies seem to need to have an enemy. We're the easiest choice for these sorts of Groups- the democratic socialists of Europe, while historically responsible for most of the problems of this area of the world, aren't the power-that-is. That, and Europe doesn't sell Isreal a lot of weaponry.

4. Isreal's continued existence is a fearful reminder that all things are transient. If I were a Saudi prince, I'd look at Isreal's displaced Palestinian Arabs and say, "but for the grace of Allah go I".

Anyhow, I'm hardly a cowardly racist- I'm part Iroquois, German and Swedish, so I look vaguely Jewish/Arabic, I talk like a native of my state, and I have friends from all over the world. And I don't advocate the eradication of a people- that would put me on a par with Nazis and other thugs.

At the same time, I don't think that we're going to see an end to these sorts of attacks until we have dismantled the nations responsible for their funding, training, and support. I hate jingoistic rhetoric, but unlike some who have responded to the events here, I don't think that we should accept this as just one of the costs of being a superpower. In short, if the radicals of the world want a war, we should bring it to them, wherever governments with foolish ideas about their best interests accept them.

Solar

September 12th, 2001, 06:52 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Originally posted by Hadrian Aventine:

Excuse me if this is rude, but biological warfare and such is Tom Clancy "If" items.

Originally posted by Puke:
speaking of tom clancy, cnn is linking to some interview with him and citing him as an authority on terrorist's orginizational logistics. no wonder people condenm western culture.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yesterday as I stared in shock at my television screen, something about the whole scenario seemed eerily familiar. Last night I finally remembered what it was.

In 1996 I read a book by Tom Clancy called Executive Orders. In the book, terrorists crash a 747 into the capitol building, killing almost everyone inside. It's almost spooky re-reading the scenes of devastation in light of what's happened.

I have to say that I, too, am stunned that we didn't see this coming. If Tom Clancy, a novel writer, could predict an airliner being used as a terrorist weapon, why the hell is American Intelligence scratching their collective heads saying "Gee...I dunno. We never really thought about this kinda thing."

A couple of other warning signs that went unheeded:
Remember the small plane that managed to crash into the Clinton white house?

Even the Columbine shooters wrote about stealing/hijacking a plane and crashing it into Washington.

I don't mean to be critical. I'm just saddened that it took such a tragic loss of life to get the US to wake up.

Solar

[This message has been edited by Solar (edited 12 September 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Solar (edited 12 September 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Solar (edited 12 September 2001).]

dmm

September 12th, 2001, 07:05 PM

I can't help but rebut some comments posted here. Here goes:
1) Israel's military occupation of the West Bank began after they defeated a bunch of enemies, INCLUDING THE PALESTINIANS, who tried to push them into the sea. Question for all you SEIV players: What do you do with a defeated enemy? Give him all his planets back, and no apology necessary?
2) This occupation has not been brutal, as alleged on this forum. In fact, the West Bank has seen unprecedented prosperity over the Last 34 years. The West Bank Palestinians are much wealthier than the Syrian or Jordanian Palestinians. And it wouldn't have gone on for 34 years if the PLO and other Palestinian Groups had not made it their mission to destroy Israel.
3) To compare the "intifada" casualties to the recent US deaths is pure BS. First, most of the intifada deaths either occurred during a riot or were assassinations of known terrorists (or harborers of terrorists). Innocent civilian deaths, although certainly tragic, have been a small minority. Second, the numbers of intifada deaths, innocent or otherwise, do not approach 30,000, not even after 34 years of supposedly brutal military occupation.
4) To compare the economic casualties of the intifada to the recent US destruction is pure BS. The whole West Bank isn't worth one World Trade Center tower.
5) To say that Islam is really a nice, sweet religion is pure BS. Maybe this is true of most Muslims in the West, but it certainly isn't true worldwide. Fact: there is not one Muslim country in the whole world that has real freedom of religion. Even in relatively progressive Muslim countries like Egypt or Saudi Arabia, Muslims who convert to other religions are routinely murdered and the government does nothing. Maybe the majority of Muslims in those countries don't condone that behavior, but they don't stop it either. Their reaction is never more than "tsk tsk" and a slap on the wrist. The Islamics worldwide who hate America don't hate us because of our wealth or our power -- they hate us for the same reason that they hate the Israelis: because we are not Muslims, plain and simple!

BloodyRanger

September 12th, 2001, 07:06 PM

Aside from trying to "hunt down" the perpetrators of this dispicable act, we should be asking ourselves "How do we prevent this in the future?" I am personally shocked that the airspace around the Pentagon is not more tightly regulated. If there weren't SAM sites around the Capital, there should be soon. Of course, being ordered to shoot down a plane full of US Citizens would be a trying experience to say the least.

geoschmo

September 12th, 2001, 07:18 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Solar:
[BI have to say that I, too, am stunned that we didn't see this coming. If Tom Clancy, a novel writer, could predict an airliner being used as a terrorist weapon, why the hell is American Intelligence scratching their collective heads saying "Gee...I dunno. We never really thought about this kinda thing."[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are way off the mark here. Of course our intelligence operations thought about this sort of thing happening. But thinking about it and preventing it are too different things.

In the days and weeks to come we are going to hear tons of reports of information that someone should have been able to see this coming. Some of this will be rumor, but some of it will be true. But none of it changes the fact that it's very hard to infiltrate an organization such as this and discover their plans. And nearly inpossible to stop them once they have been put into motion.

How do you infiltrate an orginization who's members have dedicated their lives to. Not only that they are willing to die, but that their goal is to die in the performance of their mission?

And if you decide that's too hard, how do you stop an operation like this once it's started?

Strip searches at airports?
Armed guards on every airplane?
Fighter escorts for every airplane flying over populated areas, with orders to fire upon a fully loaded plane with innocent passengers if they deviate one iota from there prescribed flight plan?

We could move the airports 100 miles from any major city I guess.

The only way to stop things is to punish those responsible so that they they cannot do such things again.

If Bin Laden turns out to be responsible as most early indications point too, then the way we could have prevented this was to punish him for his terrorist activites over the Last 10+ years.

At the very least hounding him and pressuring other governments to not allow him sanctuary would have kept him on the run and unable to plan and execute this acts.

Geoschmo

Alpha Kodiak

September 12th, 2001, 08:02 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Originally posted by geoschmo:
<snip>
The only way to stop things is to punish those responsible so that they they cannot do such things again.

If Bin Laden turns out to be responsible as most early indications point too, then the way we could have prevented this was to punish him for his terrorist activites over the Last 10+ years.

At the very least hounding him and pressuring other governments to not allow him sanctuary would have kept him on the run and unable to plan and execute this acts.

<snip>
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm with Geo on this one. We need to find out who did this and make very sure that they (and anyone else who is like minded) find out that attacking Americans is a BAD thing, and doing so carries with it BAD consequences.

For those who don't like Americans claiming high moral ground, think about this: somebody just killed thousands, or more probably, tens of thousands of people for no reason other than to kill and cause terror. You will have to excuse us for taking the high moral ground in going after them.

golf_prez

September 12th, 2001, 08:31 PM

I am surprised that the word "Armageddon" hasn't been referenced in the media (yet). But I did read this in the paper today next to a picture of the skeleton of the WTC.

"And they cast dust on their heads, and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, Alas alas, that great city where (we) were made rich ... for in one hour is she made desolate" - Revelation 18:19

Probably just media sensasionalism... but if you believe in God and the Bible, you can't help but wonder if we are living in the times as described in Revelation.

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 08:32 PM

Geo is right. its not that we didnt see this coming, its that you cant do things to prevent this. what, eliminate airspace over cities? right. institute extremeist security policies at airports? thats giving into terrorism. my biggest complaint is 'why the heck dont we have an armed skycop on every single plane?' oooh, it costs money, and theres some sort of money shortage in America? give me a break! tightwads.

and you want SAM sites around the capitol? you dont think we have them? you dont think we have them in New York City? what exactly do you want them to do? shoot down every airliner not on a preapproved flight plan? thats really brilliant. It like the bombing of the USS Cole, its not that our port security sucks. we have guys patroling the deck with sidearms when the boat is at port. BUT, when its at a FRIENDLY port, those guns are UNLOADED because the risk of causing a political incident outweighs the risk to the boat. sam sites.. sheesh. that would make it safer to travel http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif

golf_prez

September 12th, 2001, 08:39 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Puke:
Geo is right. its not that we didnt see this coming, its that you cant do things to prevent this. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Democracy's greatest strength is our individual rights, which turns out to be our biggest weakness against those who wish to harm us.

Argh

September 12th, 2001, 08:45 PM

<lol> Alpha, I think that a Palestinian would point at the thousands of their dead and maimed who were shot with American bullets during any argument about moral culpability, but I digress. . .

We have been hounding Bin Ladin, but he's like Batman. . . he's rich, extraordinarily intelligent, and well-connected politically. The guy has a finger in a lotta people's plots, and he was given sanctuary by the Taliban precisely because he's a dangerous man. I'm sure one or several of the factions there thought that having him around would discourage other nations from butting into their private civil war http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon12.gif

Anyhow, I feel sorry for the Afgani people, because they're likely to get bombed again, and this time by their former allies. They have had the worst luck in the world, set as they are between the grumbling giant of Russia, the plots and terror of Iran, and the squabbles between India and Pakistan. The land is some of the most barren on Earth, and the people are extremely poor. . . the only things they own that are generally worth much are weapons and goats- see map at
http://education.yahoo.com/reference/factbook/af/map.html

To sum up. . . the Taliban continue to deny his culpability in this horrific crime, and no one has had the balls to step forward and claim it.

Whenever I think seriously about the worst-case scenarios that could come out of this. . . I think about a terrorist cell whose members have been briefed to perform this one task. . . and then the other cells disappear into thin air. If we cannot establish a real tie to a real group, we'll probably make one up :P

So. . . we have long wait ahead of us, folks. I think that whatever's coming next, whether it's a declaration of war on a sovereign state, diplomacy or sanctions. . . it will not occur for at least 2 months, and probably longer.

Solar

September 12th, 2001, 09:07 PM

I do agree that those responsible, and terrorists everywhere, need to be punished and prevented from ever hurting us again.

As far as preventing goes...

At the risk of exposing my ignorance, how possible is it for there to be some sort of remote control system that could take over the controls of an airliner if it deviated too far from it's flight plan and didn't respond to radio communication? I'm envisioning something much like a flight simulator that they use to train pilots. In the event of an emergency, the remote control module at the nearest airport would over-ride the plane's controls, and pilots on the ground would land the jet safely.

As far as I am aware, the technology is there. Of course, I'm just an average joe, there may be reasons why this isn't possible.
Maybe I live too much in a fantasy world, but I'm a firm believer in technology as a deterrent to crime.

I agree with Puke that money should be no object. What is money compared to human lives? I'd like to see armed skycops on every flight too.

Sorry if I have offended anyone, or wind up offending anyone now. That's not my heart.
Like everyone else in the nation, I'm still in shock right now.

Solar

dmm

September 12th, 2001, 09:36 PM

Maybe airliner pilots should be locked in their (bullet-proof) cabin at the airport, and not allowed out until they land. Terrorists would need explosives to gain access to the controls. (As part of our continuing efforts to "establish dialogue" with disaffected Groups, run-of-the-mill hijackers could still communicate demands via the intercom.)

Hotfoot

September 12th, 2001, 09:42 PM

Solar: It sounds like a nice idea, but it's impractical and downright dangerous. The second you take control away from the pilot in an emergency situation and hand it over to a computer, you've more than likely doomed them all. And it would make terrorism even easier. Terrorists wouldn't need suicide squads to hijack a plane a slam it into a target, they could just take control from a distance and do the same thing while sipping an mocha latte. Set up an alarm system, perhaps, if pilots don't enter a specific code every so often, or fail some other check-in requirement. And without the code, the plane sends out a distress call and locks itself at a specific altitude until the disarm code is entered (essentially giving it the all clear). That way control remains in the hands of the pilot, not the terrorists or a computer. And so long as the controls are locked, the terrorists wouldn't be able to pull off anything like they did yesterday.

Also, sealing the cockpit from the rest of the plane might help, but what about putting canisters of knockout gas into the ventilation systems? Something colorless and odorless, that would knock out the terrorists (and the passengers) while the pilots make an emergency landing at the nearest airport where police would be waiting to pick up the KO'd terrorists. No fuss, no muss, so long as the cockpit is seperated by an airtight seal, that is.

geoschmo

September 12th, 2001, 10:18 PM

Aircops aren't a viable deterant to what happened yesterday.

Put aside for the moment that bullets and pressurized aircraft cabins don't exactly mix. There is a reason they call it "explosive decompression" afterall.

Why do you think the terroists used knives instead of guns? I can tell you it wasn't because guns are harder to get past airport security, because they aren't. They couldn't risk having a firefight bring down a plane without accomplishing their mission first.

Now you could have aircops armed with mace and tazers I suppose. But one aircop isn't going to stop a team of hijackers except in the movies. So unless you wan't to have a dozen aircops on every airplane, forget that idea.

Sleeping gas is an intriguing idea. But the risk of an accident where the crew is incapacitated along with the passengers is kind of overwhelming no?

Geoschmo

Baron Munchausen

September 12th, 2001, 10:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dmm:
I can't help but rebut some comments posted here. Here goes:
... <snip> ...
5) To say that Islam is really a nice, sweet religion is pure BS. Maybe this is true of most Muslims in the West, but it certainly isn't true worldwide. Fact: there is not one Muslim country in the whole world that has real freedom of religion. Even in relatively progressive Muslim countries like Egypt or Saudi Arabia, Muslims who convert to other religions are routinely murdered and the government does nothing. Maybe the majority of Muslims in those countries don't condone that behavior, but they don't stop it either. Their reaction is never more than "tsk tsk" and a slap on the wrist. The Islamics worldwide who hate America don't hate us because of our wealth or our power -- they hate us for the same reason that they hate the Israelis: because we are not Muslims, plain and simple!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, and how is this different from assorted Christians in the not-very-distant past hating everyone who wasn't a Christian? And specifically the exact same narrow denomination of Christian as themselves... Until the 18th Century there was not one 'Christian' country that allowed freedom of religion. You were either a member of the state denomination of Christianity or you were murdered in a public ceremony to scare everyone else into submission. It took a long time for any degree of tolerance to emerge. Meanwhile there were authorized conquerers chanting about 'Christianizing the heathens' while slaughtering, raping, and pillaging the people of the 'new' world. Hardly any less horrible than the Muslim "Jihads"...

Both of the "Monotheist" religions claiming to derive from Judaism are responsible for an incredible catalog of crimes, too many to even begin to list, many of which would qualify for the labels 'crimes against humanity' and/or 'genocide' today. Yet, there have also been both 'Christians' and 'Muslims' through history who actually read their scriptures and recognized that their religion said things like 'do not kill'. Islam may not be a "nice, sweet" religion but it's no more responsible for lunatics who use it to justify their lunacy than Christianity is to blame for the brutal conquest of the Americas or thousands of other crimes committed by criminals trying to use it as justification. Cultures have phases of development, much like people. Just think of Muslims today as Medieval Christians and you'll see there's no real difference between the religions.

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 10:33 PM

knockout gas? why not happy gas? let us all get high on our flights, and i bet people would not hate flying as much. locking the cockpit aint a bad idea, but where would they pee? airlines ARE cheap, and another bathroom is probably a bit much to ask.

as for explosive decompression, its only explosive when you have gaping holes ripped into the plane. and low calibur sidearms, especially with frangible or hollowpoint rounds, would probably be stopped by the fusealage. tazers, shock batons, KO gas (even in a canister delivered by the skycop) or gel rounds would be perfectly effective. I would stand by bullets tho, they have a long track record for getting the job done, and sometimes the risks are sufficient to mandate their use.

hell, i dont care if he only has an expandable ASP baton, just having the guy on the plane would be an effective measure. its called a deturant force, it does not matter if he is passenger 47 or not, as long as he is one more obsticle that potential hijackers would have to deal with.

Baron Munchausen

September 12th, 2001, 10:51 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dmm:
I can't help but rebut some comments posted here. Here goes:
1) Israel's military occupation of the West Bank began after they defeated a bunch of enemies, INCLUDING THE PALESTINIANS, who tried to push them into the sea. Question for all you SEIV players: What do you do with a defeated enemy? Give him all his planets back, and no apology necessary?
2) This occupation has not been brutal, as alleged on this forum. In fact, the West Bank has seen unprecedented prosperity over the Last 34 years. The West Bank Palestinians are much wealthier than the Syrian or Jordanian Palestinians. And it wouldn't have gone on for 34 years if the PLO and other Palestinian Groups had not made it their mission to destroy Israel.
3) To compare the "intifada" casualties to the recent US deaths is pure BS. First, most of the intifada deaths either occurred during a riot or were assassinations of known terrorists (or harborers of terrorists). Innocent civilian deaths, although certainly tragic, have been a small minority. Second, the numbers of intifada deaths, innocent or otherwise, do not approach 30,000, not even after 34 years of supposedly brutal military occupation.
4) To compare the economic casualties of the intifada to the recent US destruction is pure BS. The whole West Bank isn't worth one World Trade Center tower.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now, to deal with your other comments (though this will appear before the comment on your final remark...)

You first four points actually are one single point. And not a pleasant one.

Actually, Israeli occupation begins in 1948. They NEVER HAD ANY RIGHT to the land to begin with. It's been one long invasion, just like the creation of the United States from the 'new' world, that just happened to have several million inconveniant natives. Do you challenge the historical record that the Palestinians had been living there for centuries? Or are they the wrong color to have rights to land they've occupied for centuries? They were trying to 'push them into the sea' because they CAME FROM THE SEA. They were invaders. The SE IV analogy is just as relevant on the other foot. How do you deal with an invader? Give him your territory with a smile and wander off to die? Or fight back?

The small technical differences between the Israeli occupation and some other historical parallels, that the Palestinians have not been slaughtered en masse but piecemeal, or that the people who are courageous enough to resist openly are more likely to get shot hardly makes it morally right. Living in this media-saturated age, they know they can't get away with open mass-murder. If not for the ubiquity of cameras, I have little doubt they'd find ways to reduce the population of Palestinians more quickly.

But you really betray the vulgar American mindset that makes people angry by your final comment. The 'value' of the West Bank is irrelevant. These people want the right to live their own lives, with self-determination and dignity, not performing menial labor for Israelis at pittance wages when their mood is good, and cowering in the ramshackle homes their wages can buy when their mood is bad. Human dignity is not about money, and having a lot of it doesn't make a stupid dork a better human being. Both Israelis and Americans are unable to deal effectively with the Arabs (of which the Palestinians are just one sub-division) precisely because they cannot think of them as anything but grubby primitives who don't know their place. Until this attitude changes, both nations are going to continue to have problems like the intifada and the WTC event. Not that such behavior is "justifiable" but it is pretty much inevitable when you oppress people that some of them will snap and start doing crazy things. Unfortunately, as usually happens with violence, the propogation is mostly random. The 'revenge' of some twisted true believer will end up hitting other innocents rather than the actual oppressor. The thousands of office workers in the WTC are hardly responsible for US foreign policy supporting Israeli conquest. I can only hope that the US does not continue the cycle, but takes considerable care to properly identify the individuals behind this WTC attack and acts intelligently to punish only those individuals.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 12 September 2001).]

LazarusLong42

September 12th, 2001, 10:55 PM

Quick PBW note: PBW games have been set to turn over only after all turns have been uploaded, in case any players are unavailable. Also, the PBW front page has some links that may be useful in this time of crisis... although those same links are pretty much everywhere now.

LL

geoschmo

September 12th, 2001, 11:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Puke:
as for explosive decompression, its only explosive when you have gaping holes ripped into the plane. and low calibur sidearms, especially with frangible or hollowpoint rounds, would probably be stopped by the fusealage. tazers, shock batons, KO gas (even in a canister delivered by the skycop) or gel rounds would be perfectly effective. I would stand by bullets tho, they have a long track record for getting the job done, and sometimes the risks are sufficient to mandate their use.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Dude, the reason they call it "explosive" decompression is that the hole starts out small, and gets bigger, real fast.

And even low velocity rounds will penetrate an airplanes fusealage. Commercial aircraft fuselages are designed with the least amount and lightest material available. It's not exactly reynolds wrap or anything, but is itn't much better. They aren't designed to stop bullets. A bullet that can't puncture an aircraft fuselage would break your skin to be sure, but it isn't going to have any stopping power against a person detemined to cause you bodily harm.

And even if you had the "magic bullet" that kills people and won't punch holes in the side of the plane, you haven't answered how one guy is going to stop a team of terrorists.

On at least one of the planes hijacked yesterday, the flight crew kept the cockpit locked, but opened it up when the terrorists started hurting stewardesses and passengers. What's to stop a aircop from succumbing to the same demand?

It's just not a workable solution. Sorry. That's why they stopped doing it, as much as the money reasons.

Skycops are just not an effective deterant against this kind of terrorism. They may make the passengers feel safer, but they don't actually make them safer.

Geoschmo

[This message has been edited by geoschmo (edited 12 September 2001).]

Puke

September 12th, 2001, 11:19 PM

no. it might be explosive as you describe on a space shuttle, but there is not enough of a pressure differential on a commercial flight to rend the plane appart. the times where there have been problems is when something has taken a chunk out of the plane and the wind sheer has torn it appart. even if bullets are not used, there are plenty of non lethal methods a skycop could use, and even if he is not a superhero, the presence of one would help to discourage would be terrorists. sure they might give into the same pressures that caused the pilots to unlock the door, but its better than nothing. I think having a guy with a gas canister is the best idea anyone has had.

sufice to say, we dont have those now, and nothing we come up with is going to save the dead folks on those four airplanes. now is the time for us to become the pig of a nation that everyone hates us for. to help the political parties that we favor at the moment overthrow those that are currently inconvinent to us. now is when we should be working to dismantle ideologies that work against our best interests, and to setup new puppet governments that will hopefully serve us better than the Last batch. no matter how many kinder more sensitive advocates for individual rights chime up about basic human values, thats what we are going to do, and keep doing. America is an Empire, and so are all of our NATO allies. people only point to us in distaste because they dont like looking at themselves.

Hotfoot

September 12th, 2001, 11:21 PM

Solutions to problems with the sleeping gas problem:

-ensure that the essential crew, pilots, co-pilots, navigators, all have an independant air supply in the case of an emergency. Even their drop-down oxygen masks could be modified for the job.

-give pilots catheder bags. I think there's a john near the cockpit anyway. You could seal off everything after that.

-if for some reason the pilots are incapacitated as well, use the regular update code I mentioned earlier. If the pilots get knocked out, autopilots take over and level the plane out and keep it locked at a specific "safe" altitude.

tesco samoa

September 12th, 2001, 11:25 PM

I am just back from one of the most frustrating days of work.

I almost lost it today.

All I heard was this country should pay. Bomb the F*&^ers back to the stone age. Bah Bah Bah.

Damn Stupid Ignorant People.

I walked up to one guy and told him that I resented what he was saying. First words were "You ******* have some Respect."

I then told him that as being an Irish Man I resented this Racial Sterotyping.

I asked him if England had a right to carpet bomb Northern Ireland or Ireland after a car bomb.

Know what the guy said.

Well that's different.

How I asked.

He would not answer.

That's too bad.

I hope cooler heads prevail in this.

Bombing a country and killing more innocent people is not the right answer.

If I offended anyone with this post I am truely sorry. That was not the intent of this post. I am just a little angry and want to vent some steam. And I trust the people in this forum to take it in stride.

If you feel I was wrong doing what I did today. That is ok. I understand. But I hope you understand why I did it as well.

May this post find you in good health and improving spirits.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

LazarusLong42

September 12th, 2001, 11:31 PM

Tesco, I dare say cooler heads will prevail on the large scale. People like the ******* you spoke to rarely have any more political/military power than being a low-grade NCO or a police lieutenant.

Unfortunately, that sort of person may go around shooting up mosques, as has now happened at least once. I merely hope that the police and the justice system treat these people as exactly what they are--common criminals--rather than turning the other way while it happens.

LL

Hotfoot

September 12th, 2001, 11:37 PM

Tesco: I agree with you. Frankly, I'm saddened by all the people I know who are saying "bomb the ****ing ****wits."

It really is not a bright moment for the world.

tesco samoa

September 12th, 2001, 11:46 PM

it's scary seeing the world change. and it did change. Only time will show if it will get better or worse. Take care everyone.
I am off to have a pint with my dad and talk about our hero's ( Soccer, football hockey and movies) maybe with a little more vigor than usual. But it will be a good distraction. Talk to you all tomorrow.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

AJC

September 13th, 2001, 01:11 AM

The world did change yesterday - and I think we can safely say that the view of the world changed for the average American, and not for the better.
There cannot and never will be justice derived from "getting" the terrorists who killed apparently thousands of people in the attacks yesterday. Putting these people on trial, in Jail, killing them, or bombing the host countries into the stone age will never bring justice- for there is no Justice in war.

It is unfortunate that in the coming days people who are just as innocent as those killed in NYC will most likely be killed in some country across the world. It is a sad day for all of humanity.

What happen to our country yesterday is unacceptable and right or wrong , vengence will be visited on the perpertrators and their host countries. I grieve for all those who have died and will die in the coming days and months.
In my entire 36 years of life I have never seen my fellow Americans so enraged. I have seen people waving flags on overpasses, flags going up at homes, men and women crying silently in anger and I am watching the shock of yesterday turn to a simmering rage, much like what you hear happened in the USA after Pearl Harbor. These terrorist have awakened a sleeping giant, the American population, and they have made a terrible miscalculation. When will people learn that nothing changes because of these acts of violence visited on innocents, they only intensify the issues at hand. . .
Some have compared yesterday to Pearl Harbor - I say its worse. Pearl Harbor was horrible - but it was an attack on military targets by an enemy with a face. Yesterday was an act of violence by worthless cowardly people- who have visited destruction on our neighbors, friends, Moms, Dads, Brothers and sisters. The people who committed these acts are people who are so small that they cannot think for themselves, Instead they are manipulated by individuals who themselves sit in the shadows, in the comfort and safety of their homes while these poor misguided souls do their dirty work for them.
God help us all in the coming weeks.
My thoughts prayers go out to the people of NYC and Washington DC.

[This message has been edited by AJC (edited 13 September 2001).]

Fred

September 13th, 2001, 01:44 AM

NATO today has, the first time ever in its history, declared the invoking of Article V of the NATO charter, the mutual defence situation.

This declares an attack on any member of the alliance is to be considered an attack on all of them.

All NATO armed forces were set to a high state of alert.
Europe now stands shoulder to shoulder with its United States friends and allies.

We in germany are deeply shocked, but dedicated to support the United States with all actions they will take, be it political, diplomatic or military actions. This state of mind applies to all other NATO and EU members.

We mourn for the innocent victims in NYC and Washington, that were hit by an unprecedented act of murder.

Take care you all!

Fred
Germany

Mordante

September 13th, 2001, 01:46 AM

Well my world view changed on tuesday I can tell you. I'm British, and I watched the developing massacre live on BBC, and besides offering my sympathy and best regards to anyone who lost friends and family in those outrages, I am now seriously wondering exactly where our civilisation goes from here.

Is the USA military actually capable of delivering any sort of proportionate justice for this? I mean, 20-30 terrorists in exchange for tens of thousands of innocents -how do you punish that and answer the need for vengeance that will burn in millions of breasts across America and the West?

With a few missiles and ineffective airstrikes? I don't think so. It really does need the "war" that bush and his advisors are talking about, but that really will shake the world order and take tremendous guts and resolve to make it happen - I hope it does.

Prior to tuesday I was quietly opposed to the private ownership of handguns and civilian gun proliferation .... now, well frankly, I feel that if anyone is going to wield weapons in sensitive environments it ought to be ordinary people not the crazies and fanatics. I find it absolutely heartbreaking to think of the passengers on those airliners rendered helpless by a rabble of fanatics with knives and cardboard-cutters.

Frankly, let reservists and civil authorities carry guns on airplanes from here on in ... If this "war" on terrorism is to be won then the ordinary guy on the street needs the tools to fight back.

And this from a British liberal ...

Well, I'm with you guys ...

geoschmo

September 13th, 2001, 02:48 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I asked him if England had a right to carpet bomb Northern Ireland or Ireland after a car bomb.

Know what the guy said.

Well that's different.

How I asked.

He would not answer.

That's too bad. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I can give you hundreds of reasons why this is different. In the next few days and weeks I will be able to give you thousands, God forbid possibly tens of thousands of reasons why this is different.

This is not a simple act of terroism.
This is not a lunatic car bomb in market in Dublin.
This is not a lunatic with dynamite strapped to his body blowing up a bus in Tele Viv.
This is not a lunatic with a machine gun in Gaza.
This is not a lunatic with a truck full of fertalizer in Oklahoma City.

This was a well planed, well financed, well thought out attack.

It is not simply sabre rattling to say this is an act of war. It's a different kind of war to be sure, but it is a war nonetheless.

If a nation, any nation, can be shown to have been involved in this, even indirectly by simply allowing those guilty freedom of movement and the ability to train, then that nation can be, MUST be held responsible. Eqully responsible to those that took an active part in the actions.

Random bombing, no. But if it takes carpet bombing, if it takes battalions of soldiers, if it takes many mnay deaths, even the deaths of US soldiers, this cannot be allowed to stand.

The only way to prevent these acts is to make those responisble, even indirectly pay such a high price for their actions that others in the future will see the futility of these kinds of things.

Geoschmo

Taqwus

September 13th, 2001, 03:06 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Mordante:
Well my world view changed on tuesday I can tell you. I'm British, and I watched the developing massacre live on BBC, and besides offering my sympathy and best regards to anyone who lost friends and family in those outrages, I am now seriously wondering exactly where our civilisation goes from here.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe not THAT much of a change in worldview. I seem to recall a decade or so ago, when plane and ship (remember the Achille Lauro?) hijackings were much more common and certain factions significantly more active -- the Abu Nidal group, Baeder-Meinhof (sp? Also known as Red Army Faction, IIRC), and others -- it was common practice for hijackers to demand passports, to allow them to single out Americans.

Some of these people have been pissed off at the United States for a long, long time, and perhaps with the Cold War over there are fewer barracks (in, say, Beirut) providing convenient targets.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>[/B]
Is the USA military actually capable of delivering any sort of proportionate justice for this? I mean, 20-30 terrorists in exchange for tens of thousands of innocents -how do you punish that and answer the need for vengeance that will burn in millions of breasts across America and the West?
[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't, really. You do, however, significantly boost HUMINT (human intelligence. It's broadly accepted, IIRC, that the US pays too much attention to ELINT/SIGINT (electronic / signals), and relies too much on its satellites and other technology, and far too little to human assets. The KGB was far better than its Western counterparts, albeit it was working with a far easier target -- an open society.

We also, hopefully, actually notice that airport security has been woefully pathetic in the United States. As recent as two weeks ago, airlines were still providing metal cutlery, for instance. A butter knife may not be serrated, but it's sure going to hurt jammed into somebody's jugular. And I've even had a laptop unquestioned, on a flight to Egypt no less.

The 4-inch rule for knives, which I didn't know about (my SAK -- a Ranger model, something like an 85mm non-locking blade IIRC -- always went in my checked-in luggage), doesn't seem terribly swift, either. I wouldn't relish being slashed with a 1-inch blade, let alone 4.

We probably pay much more attention to finding drugs than weaponry, which is remarkably complacent.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
With a few missiles and ineffective airstrikes? I don't think so. It really does need the "war" that bush and his advisors are talking about, but that really will shake the world order and take tremendous guts and resolve to make it happen - I hope it does.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this may turn into a long-term conflict. Actually, it's *been* a long-term conflict, since we've been aiding other nations against terrorists for a long time -- providing training, sharing intelligence data, and so forth. More important than missiles are developing human assets to provide a better probability of warning, although I'm not too optimistic about the possibility of infiltrating fanatical Groups... assuming that most remaining Groups are not run by fools (and, to have survived this long, they probably are not) they are going to be careful about giving out operational details (IOW, compartmentalization) or even accepting people without having established clear bona fides.

Even if bin Laden showed up and publicly blew himself up in Times Square, it would not end there, anymore than the suicide bombings in Israel stopped after the Israelis managed to nab the one dubbed "the Engineer". Security is always an on-going process, and one in which an open society will necessarily have great difficulty.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Prior to tuesday I was quietly opposed to the private ownership of handguns and civilian gun proliferation .... now, well frankly, I feel that if anyone is going to wield weapons in sensitive environments it ought to be ordinary people not the crazies and fanatics. I find it absolutely heartbreaking to think of the passengers on those airliners rendered helpless by a rabble of fanatics with knives and cardboard-cutters.

Frankly, let reservists and civil authorities carry guns on airplanes from here on in ... If this "war" on terrorism is to be won then the ordinary guy on the street needs the tools to fight back.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They'd better have special ammo loads, then. I'm also not particularly thrilled at the idea of untrained "ordinary guys", incredibly paranoid (trivia: a local radio station reported that gun sales were up 15-30% at various gun stores nearby), packing heat in such an unfavorable area -- a narrowly confined region with plenty of innocent civillians, and unusually high potential negative consequences for stray shots. And I'm not even a Sikh (IIRC, they carry knives for religious reasons, and to an ignorant paranoid, might be mistaken for an Arab, headgear and all).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
And this from a British liberal ...

Well, I'm with you guys ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Deathstalker

September 13th, 2001, 03:25 AM

Don't know if anyone else saw this but it was reported on the DC Comics posting Boards with a link. There was a t-shirt place selling t-shirts with the logo 'I crashed into the world trade centre, and all I got was this lousy t-shirt'.....The poster on the comic board rallied people and soon hundreds were emailing in with their outrage at such a thing...The offending merchandise was removed....how anyone can take advantage of such a tragedy for profit is beyond me....The sad thing is in probally a year or two there will be a movie of the week or something.....

Askan Nightbringer

September 13th, 2001, 03:40 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:

If a nation, any nation, can be shown to have been involved in this, even indirectly by simply allowing those guilty freedom of movement and the ability to train, then that nation can be, MUST be held responsible. Eqully responsible to those that took an active part in the actions.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now thats a big and dangerous statement.
Did the nation that
a) Trained and armed Iraqi soldiers
b) Supported Soharto when he murdered a MILLION people in his military coup, stating that this would be great for the "global" economy
c) Sent that ex-Panama dictator to military school

ever take some responsibility for those nutters.

I think not.
So how do you think the innocents in those cases felt?

I'm ashamed of my country's involvement in the original occupation of East Timor by Indonesia , and if some angry East Timorese blew up something in my city I'de be horrified, but I would understand where their anger came from (I wouldn't understand their anger, just where it came from).

The US should be looking at its foreign policy, and its citizens should be asking their government "Why would people do this to us?". Thats how you fix the problem.

Terrorism sux, but then all violence against innocents sux and is never justified.

Askan

dogscoff

September 13th, 2001, 10:17 AM

*APPLAUSE* I fully agree with what the Baron has just said. As for the "Nice, sweet religion" debate... well islam is and it isn't. Like Christianity, it depends entirely on your interpretation of the holy scriptures.

Just look up a few different Christian factions on the web for examples- one set of people will find lines in the bible that clearly condemn homosexuality as wrong and evil. Another will find something else which says that God loves gay people. Take your pick. The bible says whatever you want it to say, as does pretty much any religious document, I imagine. (I think the same applies to the american constitution, BTW)

As an atheist I feel I can be fairly impartial here, and from where I'm standing, islam and christianity seem to be pretty much the same. What I mean is, they seem to produce the same kinds of people. We have a lot of muslims here in the UK and they are just regular people. Not bomb wielding fanatics, just normal people.

A few interesting facts on Islam:

- Islam is completely decentralised - there is no "Pope equivalent" or God-appointed hierarchy giving out orders to destroy western civilisation. The people who have issued Fatwas (ie against Salman Rushdie) were influential individuals, not religious leaders. Individual muslims are free to follow a Fatwa or ignore it. Muslim governments like the Taliban have no influence outside their own country and do NOT represent the muslim faith as a whole. No- one does.

-Fatwa does *NOT* translate as "death sentence". Jihad does *NOT* translate as "holy war".

- Christianity and islam are siblings, both offshoots of the Jewish faith. The difference is that muslims believe Mohammed was the Messiah and Christians think it was Jesus, about 1200 years earlier. Muslims still regard Jesus as an important prophet.
(The Jews are still waiting for the Messiah...)

- The koran (Qu'ran, whatever) advocates the peace and charity bit just as much as the bible ever did. All the "Thou shalt not kill" stuff is in there, and it is every Muslim's duty to give a certain percentage of their income to helping the less fortunate.

On a different subject...
I agree that it would be stupid putting guns on planes. There are alternatives though - Tasers are also a good idea, but a ranged weapon has obvious advantages. How about non-explosive guns (pneumatic/ catapult type weapons) firing tranquilisers? A crossbow even?

As for tranquilising the entire plane in an emergency situation... the main drawback there is that the dosage required to knock out a large hijacker would probably be dangerous/ fatal for a child or a baby or a passenger on medication. I understand that the safety of the entire plane / people on the ground is at stake, but those reasons would probably be enough to prevent any airline from using that strategy. (After all, if the only people likely to survive a hijacking were fit, healthy adults then they would sell a lot less tickets.)

0.02

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

Puke

September 13th, 2001, 10:27 AM

while civilians should probably be armed, and should be educated about the safe and effective use of arms before being allowed to have or bear arms, its probably a very BAD idea to arm civilians for any specific purpose. its probably a MORONIC idea to let them have such arms on a commercial airplane. primarily because people are recationary, tend to panic, and even when not in a fight or flight situation, most people are just plain DUMB.

subways are different tho. everyone should have a gun on the subway. maybe two or three. they should be in safe places though, because i can invision alot of firearms theft if they are somewhere easy to reach when you are elbow to elbow with a dozzen faceless people.

Exculcator

September 13th, 2001, 11:02 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by askan:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by geoschmo:

If a nation, any nation, can be shown to have been involved in this, even indirectly by simply allowing those guilty freedom of movement and the ability to train, then that nation can be, MUST be held responsible. Eqully responsible to those that took an active part in the actions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now thats a big and dangerous statement.

Askan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed.
Wasn't it the US that created this monster Bin Laden in the first place?
Back when he was fighting the Soviet empire it was allright for him to murder, he got CIA training and support to do so. Now that he has turned against the American empire, it is a different matter.
America is indeed an empire, as Puke boldly states, and it IS imperialistic, in that it has dirtied it's hands in external affairs on numerous occasions. Askan's list is by no means complete. Besides actual dirty work there is huge pressure on nations to view and do things 'The American Way'.
To you and me the frase 'The American way' sounds like a good thing but to many others it certainly does not.
Many people bear a grudge against the US and it's supremacy. And 'resistance' has been going on for a long time. It just wasn't waged on American home soil and on such a scale.
Now, I am not saying that America is reaping what it has sown but it is indeed a war. A war that, seen from the other's viewpoint, could be regarded as a freedom fight against American dominance and they fight it as any other group has done in history, when they were confronted by a military machine many times superior. One calls them guerilla's or maquis or partisans the other calls them terrorists, bandits, rebels. It is an age old dilemma and it is now America's turn to wonder how to deal with such an enemy. Do you use oppression(turn the state into a police state) , retaliate(against Afghanistan?), search and destroy?
Very difficult indeed. Decisions not to be taken lightly.
None of us want to live in a police state like the old Soviet Union or the Third Reich, with propaganda and security ensuring that everebody sees things the 'right way'.
As for retaliation,Austria's decision to retaliate against Serbia, harbouring and supporting the assasins of their crown-prince, led to World War I. Please remember.

Maybe search and destroy remains the best option.Although it does not give you immediate satisfaction for the grief and horror of the attack, it does reduce the risk of creating even more hate and killing the wrong people.

my 2 cents, I guess.

dogscoff

September 13th, 2001, 02:13 PM

QUOTE:
the rest of the world will owe us another debt of gratitude for d
/QUOTE

Is this really what you Americans believe? That the rest of the world owes you a favour because you (eventually) took part in the World Wars? You don't think 50 years of economic supremacy and the assimilation of half the planet into your mindset and culture is reward enough? Someone please tell me he's the only one...

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

Exculcator

September 13th, 2001, 02:31 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
[QUOTE]I beleive you are confusing Asami Bin Laden with the Afgan rebels. Bin Laden had nothing to do that I have ever heard with the Afgan strugle against the former Soviet occupation.
Geoschmo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, I am not confused.
Was afraid I was for a minute but here's a recent article on Bin Laden. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/3/214858.shtml

And one from the Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4095663,00.html

[This message has been edited by Exculcator (edited 13 September 2001).]

geoschmo

September 13th, 2001, 02:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Exculcator:
Sorry, I am not confused.
Was afraid I was for a minute but here's a recent article on Bin Laden.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I stand corrected. I was not aware of that. But it does not change the fact that he must be dealt with.

If you own and raise a vicious dog, and one day the dog attacks and kill your children, then you in fact hold much of the ultimate responsibilty. But do you simply fall on the floor and wail "What have I done to my children?" or do you get your gun, and shoot the dog?

I have no doubt that ultimatley this will have serious repurcussions within the our government and our intelligence agencies.

I am sorry dogscoff if I have offended you. I am very angry. We are all very angry. But I am not the only American that feels this way. And many non-Americans feel this way as well.

I cannot believe you would rather have lived these Last 50 years under the oppression of the Axis powers.

Geoschmo

geoschmo

September 13th, 2001, 03:09 PM

To all of you, especially those from other countries.

I appologize for allowing my anger and my fear for seeping into my Last few Posts. I know many of you live in coutries where these kinds of things are more expected. But the fact is that here, they are not.

Or were not. We Americans have been changed in the Last few days. I hope for the better, but I do not know that for sure. Hopefully our leaders can remain calm in these trying times and only do what is right.

I will try to keep my further Posts here limited to Space Empires.

And I will try to get a hold of myself.

Geoschmo

dogscoff

September 13th, 2001, 03:17 PM

QUOTE:
I cannot believe you would rather have lived these Last 50 years under the oppression of the Axis powers.
/QUOTE

At least the trains would run on time... (Rather than crash into one another because the shareholders don't want to pay for safety technology)
/JOKE

Of course I wouldn't, but the US did not win the war on it's own. The European powers fought bravely and suffered hugely because they were defending their homelands.

Credit to the US for coming all the way across the Atlantic to fight an enemy which wasn't a direct or immediate threat, but to take all the credit and say that the world owes you a debt of gratitude for that is absurd. US interests were served well enough by involvement in the European wars, and besides, what about the Canadians who also lost bomber crews and troops? What about the Australians? The Kiwis?

I don't condone Tuesday's actions, of course I don't, but it's very easy for me to see how so much anti- US sentiment could exist.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

Alpha Kodiak

September 13th, 2001, 03:53 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogscoff:
QUOTE:
the rest of the world will owe us another debt of gratitude for d
/QUOTE

Is this really what you Americans believe? That the rest of the world owes you a favour because you (eventually) took part in the World Wars? You don't think 50 years of economic supremacy and the assimilation of half the planet into your mindset and culture is reward enough? Someone please tell me he's the only one...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We're not asking for a favor, we just don't like being kicked while we are down. It is not fun to have thousands of your people die and then have people give reasons for why we are so horrible that we shouldn't do anything about it.

Alpha Kodiak

September 13th, 2001, 04:00 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
To all of you, especially those from other countries.

I appologize for allowing my anger and my fear for seeping into my Last few Posts. I know many of you live in coutries where these kinds of things are more expected. But the fact is that here, they are not.

Or were not. We Americans have been changed in the Last few days. I hope for the better, but I do not know that for sure. Hopefully our leaders can remain calm in these trying times and only do what is right.

I will try to keep my further Posts here limited to Space Empires.

And I will try to get a hold of myself.

Geoschmo

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Geo,

You are not alone. I too am finding it difficult to deal with the current events. It is not the attack that hurts the most, but those who choose to take pot shots at us as we try to deal with this situation. (I'll probably draw some with this post, but I don't care anymore.) I think I will now drop this subject as well. I do not need any more heartburn in my life right at the moment.

dogscoff

September 13th, 2001, 04:20 PM

OK, the meaning of my post has been misunderstood here. It's my own fault for addressing Geoshmoe's "another debt of gratitude" out of the context of his post.

QUOTE:
have thousands of your people die and then have people give reasons for why we are so horrible that we shouldn't do anything about it.
/QUOTE

I never said we were doing you a favour and I nver said you shouldn't do something about terrorism. I was just reacting to Geoschmoe's comment about everyone owing the US a favour (Actually, he said "debt of gratitude". ~Same thing.)

You're right, it doesn't matter where this guy came from, he can't be allowed to continue. (Assuming he actually did it, that is.) By all means defend yourselves, react or counter attack (sensibly) - we'll support you. However it's never enough *just* to react- you have to look at the reasons why it happened in the first place.

I'm sorry for my comments if they have caused offence, particularly since you US ppl have plenty to deal with as it is right now. It's just that this has whole thing has stirred up a lot of US nationalism / patriotism / militarism / moralising, and for some reason that tends to get me into yank-bashing mode immediately. It probably shouldn't, but it does. Sorry.

Take a look at my previous Posts on this thread, you'll see I'm not such a bad guy=-)

*Dogscoff orders everyone a reconciliatory beer.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

[This message has been edited by dogscoff (edited 13 September 2001).]

Askan Nightbringer

September 13th, 2001, 04:33 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogscoff:
*Dogscoff orders everyone a reconciliatory beer.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll drink to that.

Askan

geoschmo

September 13th, 2001, 04:53 PM

I'll take that beer Dogscoff. And I'll buy you one too. I have read back over my words, and they were too emptionally charged, and that is why I appologized.

It may in fact be that America owes the world an apology for making this mess by enabling these people to get to where they are today. And if that is the case we are reaping what we have sown.

We may in fact owe the world an apology for delaying our entry into the two World Wars until American blood was shed.

I heard an interview with Sen. Joe Biden Last night, who incidentally is my new hero, where he spoke very eloquently to this fact. I have to paraphrase cause I don't recall all the words, but basically it was to the effect that the American people didn't move when the entire British Army was floating in the Channel (I am assuming he is talking about Dunkirk), but when bombs fell on Pearl, we moved.

I can tell you that personally I am unacustomed to being afraid. I am uncomfortable with the feeling. I don't know if this is an American thing, or just me personnaly. Tuesday I was afraid. Today I am angry.

I live in Ohio. For those of you unfamilier with America this is geographically, and even culturally many miles from New York City. Before Tuesday, New York City often times felt like as much of a foreign city to me as London.

Today I am a New Yorker.

On Monday, and every day prior in my life I looked to the sky and felt safe. I felt that I was master of all that I surveyed.

Of course I was naive, but that is how it was.

Before Tuesday my greatest fear was that another American would kill me for the twenty dollars in my pocket. I never conceived of an attack from outside.

Of course I was naive, but that is how it was.

I will tell you something that was not reported on the national news. On Tuesday afternoon as the President returned to Washington, his plane flew over Ohio. Some fighters esscorting him broke the sound barrier.

We were not warned that this might happen. At the time I was not aware what the noise was. I went outside and saw the contrails in a sky where the news had just told me there were no planes. And for a time I was frightened. My knees were were literally weak.

I was not the master of all I surveyed.

I am no longer naive.

To those that wish to do us harm, and I do not believe anybody who visits this forum is one of those...

If your goal was to make us afraid, you have suceeded.

If you goal was to take away our naivete, you have succeded.

If your goal was to make us angry, you have succeded.

If your goal was to make us weak, you have failed.

Geoschmo

Exculcator

September 13th, 2001, 04:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogscoff:

I'm sorry for my comments if they have caused offence, particularly since you US ppl have plenty to deal with as it is right now. It's just that this has whole thing has stirred up a lot of US nationalism / patriotism / militarism / moralising, and for some reason that tends to get me into yank-bashing mode immediately. It probably shouldn't, but it does. Sorry.

[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Same here, sorry.
And I certainly didn't mean that you have no right to do anything.
Hell, go shoot that dog, geoschmo!
Just wanted to say, be sure you shoot the right dog.

Can I have my beer now please..

dogscoff

September 13th, 2001, 05:06 PM

QUOTE:
We may in fact owe the world an apology for delaying our entry into the two World Wars until American blood was shed.
/QUOTE

I for one am opposed to th whole "sins of the father" thing. Dunkirk and D-Day was well before I was born, and I think it is ridiculous for a nation or a people or a religion ar anything to apologise for something perpetrated by their predecessors.
Hell, as an Englishman I'd be apologising for the rest of my life.

Furthermore I'm not too big on nationalism either. You say that you hurt because your people died. I consider them my people as much as yours; as you said yourself, in today's world New York is as far from Ohio as London.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

Alpha Kodiak

September 13th, 2001, 06:38 PM

Just another horrible effect of terrorism: it drives a wedge of fear and anger between people that are really on the same side. I, too, got caught up in emotions that made me lash out. For that, I apologize.

We need to unite to defeat these agents of terror. Then we need to unite to find fair solutions to the situations that they use as tools to inspire hatred in the people they use as pawns.

The trouble is that those solutions are going to be tough to find. We are dealing with centuries of hatred. It's not localized in the Middle East, either. There's plenty of hatred going around in the Balkans, in Africa, in Ireland, and yes, in the United States (and probably everywhere else for that matter) to generate terrorism for a long time to come.

Unfortunately, I don't know the answers. It's easy to point fingers to things that have happened in the past, and plenty of guilt to be shared. I have no delusions that the US is squeaky-clean, and there are plenty of others that can share blame as well. Somehow, we need to find answers, not point fingers.

<Steps down from soap box>

Well now, I wasn't expecting a speech when I decided to post an apology! Can't trust my own keyboard. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/shock.gif

mac5732

September 13th, 2001, 07:36 PM

All thru history, one country or another has been labeled and trashed, England, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Germany, etc. Now its our turn in the US because we're considered on top. I can understand this, but sometimes it is hard to accept. Whenever there is a disaster the US is one of the first to send help, food, clothing, medicine, etc. We have lent or given money to many nations and Groups to help their people or nations and yet how many countries in the past have done the same to us when we had disasters, ie: Hurricanes, earthquakes, etc. Have we ever condemned them for not helping? Not that I'm aware of, however I have heard and seen other countries condemn us because we didn't send enough money or help when they were in need. This is what I meant when I stated I understand but that it is hard. Terroism is a world problem not any one countrys. Hopefully what happened here will show everyone that all countries need to close ranks and fight this wholesale murder of innocents no matter where it strikes. Yes the US was unprepared and naive that it could happen here, but once awaken, they don't forget and they will react. As Yamamoto once stated " I am afraid we have awaken a sleeping Giant". CNN has just stated that there were 2 day cares on the 32nd floor of both buildings and that all indications are that none of the children made it out. I guess its things like this that make us mad to the point of unreason, but how would anyone else feel? The world needs to eliminate the slaughter of innocents by terroism no matter who or where they are along with those who support, hide and give them aid. These are not soldiers fighting for a cause, They are just plain murderers, the WTC was not a military target it was just people, men, women and children and this more then anything else in my opinion is what makes this crime so hideous, it was done on purpose, not by mistake, it was intentinal not by accident. I consider everyone on this forum friends and I hope my opinion does not take away from that, I have lost brothers & sisters (not by blood) that I have never met who were killed trying to rescue and give aid at the WTC, over 259 listed so far, let alone all the civilians and maybe this hits me a little more then others I don't know, but I just had to get this off my chest, I've seen war both while in the military and on the streets here in the US, and unless you've been there its hard to express what you have seen and experienced to understand what I'm saying here. I thank all of you for letting me get this off my chest, it helps sometimes to be able to talk about things, it makes it easier to handle.. I apoligize to anyone I have offended, I don't mean to, it just that I feel that you are friends even tho we have never met. This is a sad day for the world not just the US. The terrosits have shown that a new weapon of mass destruction can be employed, and no one, anywhere, in any city or country is immune. Be careful and God Bless the US and every country in this world and prayers to the victims and their families.

just some ideas mac

Puke

September 13th, 2001, 08:39 PM

Dogscoff, im probably one of the most imperialsitic, nationalistic bastards around here. And I dont think the world owes the States a debt of gratitude. I am perfictly happy that we have assimilated the majority of the free world into our cultural and political beliefs, like you say. I would like to have the other half, but I guess that I can wait untill we can exert our influence in another world crisis.

And when I say 'WE,' I dont just mean the States. I mean all of the other NATO countries that I look upon as brothers and equals, and I think share the same standards of living and cultural values, and political goals. we just happen to have more over here, right now.

People forget that the US is not just one nation, it is a representation of a group of independant states. I look at the EU, and I see what I hope will grow into something similar in the next hundred years.
Someday, we might have a central government between America and Europe. and its going to be based upon our shared values and beliefs. The western way of life that has so dominated the world.

terrorists strike blindly at us because they fear us. there is nothing that they can do in the face of the allied western powers, and they are scared. scared that their way of life is ending. I saw a picture the other day, looking at the damage in NY from above. the picture was taken from the ISS Alpha. We have built a temple in the stars to our western gods, how can anyone in a poverty stricken country gripped by civil war and religious strife even comprehend a foe like us? Their way of life is ending, and as we look down upon them from the heavens, there is nothing they can do about it.

I am truely sad for the crime that was committed against the US on Tuesday. But I pitty those helpless souls that we are about to destroy. even if they are spared our millitary retaliation, their way of life is not much longer for this world.

Hotfoot

September 13th, 2001, 08:48 PM

This is from an e-mail I sent a friend on the subject. Perhaps it can help a little here...
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Here's my current stance on things:
The attack was a horrible thing. To compare it to something else simply
degrades both events (Pearl Harbor, JFK, Oklahoma City) but sometimes it's
the only way to convey even a fraction of what's happened to someone who has
no other point of reference. What happened was that there was a
well-planned, well-executed, deliberate strike against the nation made by
Terrorists. These people want to instill terror into us (meaning simply
anyone who was affected, shocked, horrified by this event) and make us react
to them. It's an old lesson with a new spin, make your enemy react instead
of act, and you have won the battle. If we lash out blindly in anger,
they've won. If we give in to hate, they've won. People died all this week
because one vital thing was forgotten, we are all human. The terrorists on
the planes were human. They might not have been good people, or likeable
people, but they were still people. The people dancing in the streets in
the middle east are still people. The people who died in the plane crashes
are still people, not angels, saints, or demons. People. Humans. Able to
make their own decisions and their own mistakes, they are still humans, even
if we hate the results of those choices.

The terrorists, the people dancing in the streets, they can't very well
think of us as people. They've learned to hate us as enemies, as monsters.
They're willing to kill other people who have done nothing to them at all,
because they think that all of us are the same. They have forgotten that we
are human, it's an easy thing to forget when all you have been taught is
anger and hatred.

The people who are attacking innocent Arab-Americans are humans as well.
Humans blinded by anger, fear, hatred, and shock. They have forgotten that
the people they are hurting are human as well. Just as America forgot
during World War II that Japanese-Americans were human.

The people who want to kill the terrorists and the people dancing in the
streets have forgotten that those people are human as well. Will they feel
better about killing the humans who danced in the streets? Would they dance
in the streets if those people were dead? We can't just kill people for
being happy, even if they are feeling happy about something which to us is
tragic. They have forgotten we are human. We are the enemy to them. We
need to prove to them that we are human, not just the enemy.

The perpetrators of these actions should be brought to justice. Justice is
not vengeance. It is not revenge. It is not slaughtering the people
responsible in the most gruesome ways possible. It is not hate. Hate is
what created this, and continuing to hate will simply drag it out for
generations. I'm not saying we should love the people who did this, but we
have to remember that they are still human, even if they don't.

They want us to sink to their level, to forget that they are human and
respond accordingly. If we forget that these people were human, they will
be vindicated, and even more terrorists will spring up to replace those that
we would kill.

It's not a case of who did what first. That doesn't matter. The people
that started this are long since dead, only leaving behind a few chapters in
the history books. For all we know all this started when someone ate the
Last candy apple at the party in the beginning of the universe. I can't
answer for any raping and pillaging my Nordic ancestors might have done
centuries ago, and I shouldn't have to. I can't answer for the Inquisition,
or the Crusades, I can't answer for the actions of the Romans or the Gauls
or the Celts. I can't speak for the Neolithic man who killed a bear to
protect himself. How am I supposed to be responsible for the actions of my
father or my father's father before I was born? No one should be expected
to bear the weight of history on their shoulders, and to ask any one member
of a nation to answer for that nation's actions is ludicrious. We have to
past to reflect on, the present to act, and the future to dream. We can
only affect the now. That's all we could ever do. And what might seem
right to some people now could seem horrendous to our progeny in the future,
when the future is now. But they can't change what happened, they can only
learn and move on.

It's time to learn that every person alive is a human being, not a monster,
not a demon, not an angel, not a saint. Just something in between with the
ability to make choices and decisions, both good and bad.

If we lash out in anger, rage, fear, or terror, then the people who have
died this week have been the winning blow for the terrorists that did this.
We will have lost. It won't matter how many more die, the outcome has been
decided, and well will be what it is that we claim so much to hate.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Make of it what you will.

tesco samoa

September 13th, 2001, 08:49 PM

See this is why this forum is the #1 forum in the world. Look how we can express our anger and fears and lash out. Then through heated dicussion we stop, and release that we do not hate each other but respect each other.

I have turned to this forum to give me a little comfort, escape and hope.

Thank you all.

It is nice seeing people speak truefully with each other.

It is nice seeing people showing respect to others.

No crap, No bull. Just the heart and mind.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

dmm

September 13th, 2001, 11:15 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Actually, Israeli occupation begins in 1948. They NEVER HAD ANY RIGHT to the land to begin with. It's been one long invasion, just like the creation of the United States from the 'new' world, that just happened to have several million inconveniant natives. Do you challenge the historical record that the Palestinians had been living there for centuries? Or are they the wrong color to have rights to land they've occupied for centuries? They were trying to 'push them into the sea' because they CAME FROM THE SEA. They were invaders. The SE IV analogy is just as relevant on the other foot. How do you deal with an invader? Give him your territory with a smile and wander off to die? Or fight back?

The small technical differences between the Israeli occupation and some other historical parallels, that the Palestinians have not been slaughtered en masse but piecemeal, or that the people who are courageous enough to resist openly are more likely to get shot hardly makes it morally right. Living in this media-saturated age, they know they can't get away with open mass-murder. If not for the ubiquity of cameras, I have little doubt they'd find ways to reduce the population of Palestinians more quickly.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So, basically you are saying that Israel has no legal right to exist, that Jews have no historic claim to Palestine, that all of Israel was obtained entirely by conquest, and that the Israelis would love to kill all Palestinians. Do you really believe those things, or were you just a bit overwrought? Either way, I think you should study some more history.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
But you really betray the vulgar American mindset that makes people angry by your final comment. The 'value' of the West Bank is irrelevant. These people want the right to live their own lives, with self-determination and dignity, ...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I was simply responding to assertions that the (supposed) economic problems (supposedly) inflicted on the Palestinians justifies them inflicting economic damage on the US. My point was only that the GDP of the WTC is bigger than the GDP of the West Bank, so that's an unfair tit-for-tat even if the asserters are correct, and even if no one at the WTC had been killed. (Actually, I was overwrought, and have no hard numbers for the relative GDPs. So that Last point might be BS on my part, unless you include the rebuilding cost.)

You and I are totally in agreement that freedom is priceless.

dmm

September 13th, 2001, 11:54 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Yeah, and how is this different from assorted Christians in the not-very-distant past hating everyone who wasn't a Christian?
...
Yet, there have also been both 'Christians' and 'Muslims' through history who actually read their scriptures and recognized that their religion said things like 'do not kill'. Islam may not be a "nice, sweet" religion but it's no more responsible for lunatics who use it to justify their lunacy than Christianity is to blame for the brutal conquest of the Americas or thousands of other crimes committed by criminals trying to use it as justification. Cultures have phases of development, much like people. Just think of Muslims today as Medieval Christians and you'll see there's no real difference between the religions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So, what you are saying is that Muslims today are primitive? Should the West simply wait 500 years for their society to "grow up"? Wow! Sounds like I'm not the only arrogant Westerner!

The difference is not in maturity level; it is fundamental. For instance, Christ taught his followers to love and do good to their enemies. Mohammed taught his followers to kill their enemies. It is insulting to both Christianity and Islam to say that "there is no real difference." (Hint: don't say something like that in a Muslim country.) For a Christian perspective on the differences, see http://www.light-of-life.com/
You can probably find a Muslim perspective somewhere on the web also, but this one web site should be enough to show that Muslims and Christians have totally different worldviews.

Baron Munchausen

September 14th, 2001, 12:30 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
So, basically you are saying that Israel has no legal right to exist, that Jews have no historic claim to Palestine, that all of Israel was obtained entirely by conquest, and that the Israelis would love to kill all Palestinians. Do you really believe those things, or were you just a bit overwrought? Either way, I think you should study some more history.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, dmm, I don't need to study any more history. You don't get a lease in perpetuity on a piece of land just because your ancestors lived there once. If that were the case then most of the nations of Europe could claim most of Europe rather than just their current borders. Hmm, many of them did actually. Which is why European history was so bloody. The European Jews who invaded Palestine had/have no more claim to the land than the Irish have to Spain (which is where the Gaels originated -- they are descended from Celts who fled Roman conquest and found Ireland) or the Germans have to the Ukraine (which is where ethnic Germans are first found in history). When someone else lives on the land for centuries you cannot just move in and evict them on some claim of 'prior right'. It was a terrible mistake on the part of the Western powers to allow this to happen in Palestine, but they had some underhanded motivations of their own (if those Jews had remained in Europe they would have asked many difficult questions about the lack of response to the Holocaust) and so another innocent people was sacrificed to political expediency. So, your simplification of my views, though indeed a simplification, is essentially correct. And my views are more informed by history than you realize.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
So, what you are saying is that Muslims today are primitive? Should the West simply wait 500 years for their society to "grow up"? Wow! Sounds like I'm not the only arrogant Westerner!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, so-called 'Muslims' who think that God condones the murder of anyone in their own countries who doesn't belong to their religion, or the mass-murder of innocent people in other countries as revenge for wrongs committed by their governments are primitive. Just as so-called 'Christians' who thought that God sanctioned their right to conquer and rape the peoples of the 'new' world because they weren't 'Christians' were primitive. As I pointed out and you conveniently skipped over, there are a few people who genuinely understand what both religions are about, but they were in the minority in Medieval Europe and are in the minority now in most contemporary 'Muslim' nations. Ergo, the societies were/are primitive. That doesn't mean that any given individual Muslim is automatically primitive. Actually, not very many contemporary Westerners are that much ahead of their Medieval ancestors, but at least they have (mostly) stopped pretending to be 'Christians', which is some sort of progress. It's funny, but the 'non-religious' people of the West have now become far more "Christian" in behavior since they gave up on formal religion. An interesting paradox. (The US is of course the exception in the Western world, we're still something like 70 or 80 percent self-declared religious people. But then we also retain more of the old European imperialistic attitude, too, so that figures. They seem to go together.)

I'm well aware of the hostility among the cruder "fundamentalist" types of each of these religions to the other. These are precisely the people who are FALSE 'Christians'/'Muslims'. They are merely tribal jingoists that have chosen to twist religion for their xenophobic purposes. And yes, this phenomenon is almost EXACTLY parallel in the Muslim world today to what it was in the Christian world in the past. Genuine Christians and Muslims know that their respective religions, as opposed to the political movements masquerading as religion, are nearly the same in message. It takes some pretty major nit-picking about doctrine to generate contradiction between them. I could quote something about "the letter" and "the spirit" of the scriptures here but I've not got the reference handy. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gifAnd if the "fundamentalist" types would obey the FUNDAMENTAL rules of the religions they claim to represent, including rules like "Thou Shalt Not Kill", the strife we have in the world today could not exist.

Baron Munchausen

September 14th, 2001, 01:08 AM

It seems I was quite right about many 'Westerners' being not very far from the old primitive attitudes of their ancestors. Anyone interested in reading some quality news coverage instead of the jingoism coming from the major networks should visit salon.com and specifically http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2001/09/13/backlash/index.html for some unreported information about the reaction to recent events in our "advanced" culture. Let us hope that the spirit of civilization can restrain the spirit of tribalism.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 14 September 2001).]

Rich04

September 14th, 2001, 01:12 AM

America: The Good Neighbor.

Widespread but only partial news coverage was given recently to a remarkable editorial broadcast
from Toronto by Gordon Sinclair, a Canadian television commentator. What follows is the full text
of his trenchant remarks as printed in the Congressional Record:

"This Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly
the least appreciated people on all the earth. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and
Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and
forgave other billions in debts. None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its
remaining debts to the United States. When France was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the
Americans who propped it up, and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of
Paris. I was there. I saw it.

When earthquakes hit distant cities, it is the United States that hurries in to help. This spring,
59 American communities were flattened by tornadoes. Nobody helped. The Marshall Plan and the
Truman Policy pumped billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now newspapers in those
countries are writing about the decadent, warmongering Americans. I'd like to see just one of
those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own
airplane.

Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed
Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? If so, why don't they fly them? Why do all the International lines
except Russia fly American planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or
woman on the moon? You talk about Japanese echnocracy, and you get radios. You talk about German
technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy, and you find men on the
moon -not once, but several times -and safely home again. You talk about scandals, and the
Americans put theirs right in the store window for everybody to look at. Even their draft-dodgers
are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, and most of them, unless they are
breaking Canadian laws, are getting American dollars from ma and pa at home to spend here.

When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the
Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke,
nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name you 5000 times when the
Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when
someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don't think there was outside help even during
the San Francisco earthquake. Our neighbors have faced it alone, and I'm one Canadian who is
damned tired of hearing them get kicked around.

They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to
thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles. I hope Canada is not
one of those."

Stand proud, America!

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 01:31 AM

danm man, who cares who has a right to what land? we stole this land from the natives, we took hawaii by military force, europe has changed borders more times than i can count, the holy land has been changing hands since before the crusades, who gives a ****?

Israel invaded, we put them there, and they are our puppet state, and our method of exerting influence in the region. its good for us, bad for the poor guys on the west bank, and its their tough ****. thats probably why they dont like us very much. Like the Native Americans believed, you cant own land or have any inherant rights to it. but we sure as heck controll it right now, and i dont see that changing very soon. I dont think anybody is going to find a crusty piece of papyrus in a jar under the dead sea, and realize that its an inditement from god to give back ownership of specific parts of the world to its rightfull owners.

I was having a conversation with god just the other day over a couple of beers, and he specifically told me that the hollywood hills were my rightfull land. the bad news was he didnt think i would be able to collect on it. The Jews and the Muslims are in a similar situation of not being able to collect, but they're worse off because god didnt personally draw it out for them with a magick marker on a realestate map like he did for me.

what a silly thing to argue about. maybe it belongs to the cromagnans that us homosapiens slaughtered on our way up the foodchain. maybe we should reanimate a friggin ice man by impregnating an ape with his DNA and grant it all to him.

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 01:46 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Rich04:
America: The Good Neighbor.
...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

wow, that warms my black little heart. it really does. but to the defense of some of those countries on whom fault is placed:

we owed the French. we poo poo them alot, but we would have had our asses handed to us in 1812 if they did not bail us out. i dont like to admit that very often, but its true. and as for them ****ting on us in the streets of paris, 1 - American tourists are some of the lamest, most arrogant, ignorant ****s on the planet. and 2 - the French are rude to everyone, even each other. they cant help it.

and i believe that AIRBUS is suppose to put boing and lockheed to shame as far as airliners go. sure, our military planes are lightyears ahead, but I think that airbus wins on the commercial market.

I also have to give props to our friends in England, who did lend a big hand cleaning up some of our nastier oil spills in the past, and whom continue to support our childlike pestering of Iraq.

other than that, I have to humbly agree with the entire thing, and offer a heartfelt thanks to our northern neighbors (whom, I might add, kicked no small amount of *** in WWI, and are superb, constructive participants in any global crisis.)

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 01:58 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Wasn't it the US that created this monster Bin Laden in the first place?
Back when he was fighting the Soviet empire it was allright for him to murder, he got CIA training and support to do so.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I beleive you are confusing Asami Bin Laden with the Afgan rebels. Bin Laden had nothing to do that I have ever heard with the Afgan strugle against the former Soviet occupation. He is a Saudi Arabian and a religous zealot who caused lots of trouble in his home country and only went to Afganistan after similarly like minded religous zealots took over that country. That's the only place he could find that he could operate without fear of being returned to Saudi Arabia or America and facing justice. He is a coward, and a power monger.

I am so sick and tired of being told the U.S. can't do this or that because of "terrible" things we did in the past.

Logic like that would have kept us out of WWI and WWII.

"So what if Japan bombed Pearl Harbor? They only attacked military targets that were a threat to their interests. And Hawaii was "conqured" by the US anyway."

"So what if Germany was conquering all of Europe, twice? How is that different than what we did to the Indians?"

TOUGH! This IS different.

The rules have changed, and NOT simply because this attack took place on U.S. soil. It was naive for any of us to think that terrorism would never strike our country, especially since we live in such a free and open soceity.

But this changes the rules by the sheer scale and audacity of the attack. And by the level of training and support that would have been needed to pull this off.

I keep hearing on the news that "This is the worst terrorist attack in American history." And it makes me want to scream. This is the worst terroist attack in the history of the world.

This is not only an attack on the United States. Even though the targets were in the U.S. This was the WORLD Trade Center. Many foreign nationals undoubtedly lost their lives on Tuesday.

Every country in the world today must be saying "There but for the grace of God go I."

This is not a war between America against Afganistan.

This is a war between every civilized nation in the world, and any organization that would perpatrate such actions. And against any country that would aid and shelter any such organization.

If the Taliban government wants to avoid the bombs, they can turn over those responsible at once. I am sure things would go much better for them if they do. But they won't. Because even if they didn't "know" the extreme nature of this attack, they knew the Bin Laden was planning, and had taken actions against us in the past, and they didn't stop him or turn him over then. They are not innocent. They are not even appologetic.

They issued threats on Wedsnday that any attacks against them could cause anger and result in further suicide attaks. That sounds sorry to you? Check it out. (http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010912/wl/attack_afghan_taliban_dc.html)

The rules have changed. We didn't change them. But we are going to find those responsible, and make them pay. And the rest of the world will owe us another debt of gratitude for doing it when it's all over. And you know what? I really don't care who likes it or doesn't like it.

Geoschmo

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 02:11 AM

Gordon Sinclair died in 1984.

The speach was penned in 1973 and was in context with Trudeau's ideoligy to push Canada's culture away from American's culture.

It was a strong speach then and still remains a strong speach.

If you wish to read about Mr. Sinclair or hear this speach in his own words go to
http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/schools/rta/ccf/personal/hof/sincla_g.html

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 02:16 AM

http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/schools/rta/ccf/news/unique/american.html

Is the link on the history of that speach

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

AJC

September 14th, 2001, 03:00 AM

Man some of these Posts have really irked me and now I am going to RANT A bit....

NO country deserves what happened tuesday -just because of foreign policies! Especially to have weapons of mass destruction used on them. The explosive power of that 767 jet was pretty close to 1 kiloton when loaded with fuel and ramming a buildng at around 400 knots. With the weight and speed of that plane it was approx 123 g's of force hitting that building.

Europeans certainly shouldnt be calling the kettle black- look at your own history - Europe has a bloody and dark history abroad for several centuries and it continues today. I am sick of the America is the big bad guy rhetoric. Bombing the US just because its government wont let the Israels be destroyed and we support our allies upon request makes the US evil ?! - what a load of crap. You dont see the USA occupying or invading countries at random. We defend our allies (kuwait) and strike back at those who blow up our people and embassies (african embassies).

I would agree with anyone who said that what the Israel's tactics against the palistinians is totally wrong and an obvious failure. Its easy to be the oppressor when you have the power, But Its doesnt justify killing women children and men who are completely innocent. The US gov policies are no worse than any other western govenment.

Maybe some people dont get it - this attack isnt an just an attack on the US, its an attack on humanity, and the world. Osma Bin ladin's cronies tried to ram the Eiffle tower 2 -3 years ago and the French foiled the plot and stopped the 747 from leaving the airport. SO This was not his first try.
Just remember - now that its been done- Someone else will try again - and your country maybe next.

As for YANK bashing by the British, I am british living in the US for 34 years. You must realise Church Hill practically beg the US to get into WWII because the british were hanging on by their finger nails and didnt have the Industrial might to fight alone. the US government let Pearl Harbor happen because the citizens of the US didnt want anything to do with a european war and they had to be made angry to get involved.
Everyone in this country knows that America didnt win the war on its own, Russia and other western powers were essential to victory.
I also want you to remember The USA rebuilt Europe after it was reduced to rubble and the US and never got repaid. That was american citizens tax dollars given freely and without strings.

For those who think I am a raging american citizen - your damn right we have alot to be angry for this Last few days and the longer the body count gets the more pissed off this country is going to get, its going to be scarey, its already getting that way.

4,700+ people are missing and the pile of rubble is still 6+ stories high, with 10 city blocks wiped out.
The NYC mayor has requested 11,000 more body bags on top of the 30,000 already used- get the picture? These are not terrorism casualties - they are numbers that are seen on major battle fields in major wars.

Its just been announced that they are considering calling up the reserves... maybe its going to sink in with the rest of the world now, A war was started on tuesday.

God help the bastards who are involved and the countries that harbor them. They will unfortunately pay in a big way.

What a sad time.

[This message has been edited by AJC (edited 14 September 2001).]

[This message has been edited by AJC (edited 14 September 2001).]

Phoenix-D

September 14th, 2001, 03:08 AM

"and i believe that AIRBUS is suppose to put boing and lockheed to shame as far as airliners go. sure, our military planes are lightyears ahead, but I think that airbus wins on the commercial market.

I also have to give props to our friends in England, who did lend a big hand cleaning up some of our nastier oil spills in the past, and whom continue to support our childlike pestering of Iraq."

Keep in mind when that was written. actually, given the support that's come in, playing that over..and over.. like seems to happening is downright disrespectful.

Phoenix-D

disabled

September 14th, 2001, 03:51 AM

This is what I got say.

I will live free or I will die fighting for it. No in between.

You people who think we are stupid, arrogant, and pathetic, you know what, I take that as a compliment. Because we could have sat back, and let all those petty dictators run you over.

How many of you would be alive now if Hitler succeeded? How many would know freedom if Stalin raged unchecked? How many americans would be free if the South had won? Where would Israel be without America? Would the Balkans be at peace today? What would China and the Pacific look like with the Japanese Empire today? Would Freedom be known if America didn't rebel so long ago?

I'll tell you... You owe more than you think to this country and the ideals we are founded upon.

I say.... REMEMBER THE TWIN TOWERS!

EDIT - I send thanks to all the people and governments that have looked past thier petty differences and united with the American Republic.

[ June 13, 2003, 07:07: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 03:52 AM

i was hunting about for a se4 file that used to be available that i just CANT FIND anymore, and i came across something that might be of significane to this thread. I wont disrespect the author by pasting it here, but I will let you follow the link.
http://www.angelfire.com/tv2/NewAgeShipyards/index.html

I trust that everyone will have the respect not to nitpick and belabor the points raised there, and that any differences of oppinion can be kept to ones self. I for one, agree with the sentiment raised there.

disabled

September 14th, 2001, 03:57 AM

I will not disagree.

War is sad, but sadly unavoidable at times.

------------------
HADRIAN T. AVENTINE
admin@spaceempires.org
Administrator | SpaceEmpires.org (http://www.spaceempires.org)

Kimball

September 14th, 2001, 04:49 AM

Here is an interesting tid-bit...the United States National Anthem was played during the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace today...a first.

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 05:32 AM

Baron Munchausen

September 14th, 2001, 06:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Kimball:
Here is an interesting tid-bit...the United States National Anthem was played during the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace today...a first.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you really mean "The Star Spangled Banner"? Or do you mean "God Save the Queen" (King) as Puke suggests? This is used in the US with different lyrics (My Country 'Tis of Thee...) but it is not our national anthem. If they really played The Star Spangled Banner that would be quite an eye-opener. I guess it would be intended as a gesture of solidarity.

You know a great many foreign nationals were in the WORLD Trade Center, too. The current estimates on the BBC say British nationals killed will be 'in the middle hundreds', meaning around 500 I guess. That's close to 10 percent of the deaths and that's just one nationality. Japan estimates 100 missing, Australia close to 90, India can't make any good guesses but says Indian software companies were housed in the WTC, so it'll be more than a handful. It sounds like this will ultimately be a world tragedy rather than just an American one. Maybe it will result in really concerted international action and cooperation against terrorism. That would be much better than vigilantism by the US alone.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 14 September 2001).]

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 06:29 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Maybe it will result in really concerted international action and cooperation against terrorism. That would be much better than vigilantism by the US alone.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah, because group vigilantism is much better than the individual variety http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

not that im against it mind you, i just found the implication.. odd.

Baron Munchausen

September 14th, 2001, 06:38 AM

QUOTE]
yeah, because group vigilantism is much better than the individual variety http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

not that im against it mind you, i just found the implication.. odd.

[/QUOTE]

Actually, when you act with your entire community it's not vigilantism. There is no "world government" to take care of these things, you know. So an international coalition is the closest thing to a "justice system" you're going to get. Hopefully they will work with/through the UN, in fact.

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 06:40 AM

i keep hearing peole reference how many forign nationals were killed because its was the world trade center and not the american trade center or some nonsense like that.

if you go to any major US city, especially costal cities, you cant walk even a few blocks without tripping over ALL KINDS of forign nationals. and if you blow up ten square blocks in the financial district of any major metropolitian area, you are lible to get a few hundred of them from most major nationalities, at the least!

i guess my point is that this is a pretty open country, a close knit global economy, or something like that. draw your own conclusions. Id go on to belabor that whats good for us is good for the rest of the world, but if you dont want to go that far you can at least see that by virtue of the sheer number of forigners working in our cities, we have to have at least a few common interests with the rest of the world.

and its not like the WTC is an extension of the UN or anything, they just named the thing that because they thought it would make a neat sounding name for a landmark building. that and draw in companies from all over. it was a rather smart move, even if it did end up getting them targeted by two major terrorist attacks in the Last ten years.

[This message has been edited by Puke (edited 14 September 2001).]

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 06:49 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Actually, when you act with your entire community it's not vigilantism. There is no "world government" to take care of these things, you know. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well, the UN likes to try, and it looks like NATO is willing to help, but i get your point. i meant to suggenst that one guy is a vigilantie, a group or community used to be called a lynch mob. when they had a sherrif at the head, instead of just a drunk farmer, they got to be called a 'possie.' Maybe they will get to be called a task force or something, when its governments getting together, but i think the concept is basically the same.

again, not that im against it. I think a war on terrorism would be great, as long as it does not go the way of ronnie ray-gun's war on terrorism. i just find the parallel interesting.

Andr�s

September 14th, 2001, 07:26 AM

Although I didn�t make any post here I�ve been reading this thread with interest.

Certainly this is a sad time for Americans, especially for those who could have lost anyone. I hope no one from this forum.
And I agree that something like this should have never happened and those responsible must be punished.

I admire your passionate patriotic reaction. That�s something I something I don�t think would happen in my country. I think it�s because our former military dictatorship government used patriotism to manipulate and control people and made so many atrocities in the name of the country, that now patriotism is seen as agreeing with all that.

That said I must say I agree with most non-americans here.
If something good can come from this is that we can discuss this
Americans are not as good as they believe they are, but that doesn�t make them necessary evil.
I hope you could understand that from some people�s point of view fighting for freedom could be fighting against american oppression.
History is written by the winners. They always forget their own defects and demonize the losers. The truth is that wars are fought by human beings, in every war both sides make terrible things.

I do not fear more terrorism attacks in the near future.
The plane crash strategy will certainly not work again without the surprise factor.

I empathize with your desire of revenge, but that doesn�t solve anything. Only thing you will do is create more anti-american feelings.
I hope that mentions of war were figurative, to appease angry people, meaning strong precautions against future terrorism and do not lead to an unnecessary massacre in any arab country.

A few thoughts and opinions,

Andr�s

Quikngruvn

September 14th, 2001, 08:10 AM

It was "The Star-Spangled Banner".

As a jaded, cynical, elitist American, I must say I'm heartened at the support that the rest of the world has shown for the US, both here and from what I see on the news. I can only hope it can be sustained.

At Last count, besides NATO, the countries I know of that have pledged support to the US include Israel (naturally), Russia, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, Uzbekistan, and Pakistan. Apparently the Taliban have ticked some people off.

I feel for the populace of Afghanistan. Because of the actions of a (relatively) few, they will more than likely suffer a great deal. Iraq also.

War, to me, seems inevitable. Just not one which we've ever seen. I've taken this point of view: the US is going after criminals, arguably war criminals or criminals against humanity. Nations that help (or at least tolerate) their cause are considered to be harboring fugitives. We just happen to be bringing nearly our whole arsenal with us....

To those who hold the US in contempt, all I can say is, OK. I can sympathize, but I won't pretend to understand your point of view. Not without walking a mile or several in your shoes, anyway. Just don't hurt or kill any of us, lest we get pissed off.

BTW, Last night, one of the local TV channels ran a telethon for the Red Cross. In ten hours they had raised almost $300,000 to assist the victims in New York and Washington.

Quikngruvn

[This message has been edited by Quikngruvn (edited 14 September 2001).]

Askan Nightbringer

September 14th, 2001, 09:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Quikngruvn:

I feel for the populace of Afghanistan. Because of the actions of a (relatively) few, they will more than likely suffer a great deal. Iraq also.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ugh.
Isn't that what is happening now in the US?
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth is just going to leave the world with alot of blind, hungry people.

I don't want my country to get dragged into a war (and my pathetic excuse of a leader will be there lapping at George W's feet). I want the US to lead by example. To act with good sense and not get alot of innocent people killed because alot of innocent people were killed.

Is that too much to ask?

Askan

dogscoff

September 14th, 2001, 10:06 AM

EDIT. - Unnecessary post all but removed.

*Dogscoff wanders off in search of somewhere to sleep.

[This message has been edited by dogscoff (edited 14 September 2001).]

Kimball

September 14th, 2001, 12:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Puke:
isnt it the same tune as "god save the queen?"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought that was God Bless America. However as I speak 6:00 am CDT, they are singing our National Anthem in England at St. Paul's Cathedral (I think, it is the same place where Diana's funeral was). So, you may be right, Puke, but watch CSPAN2 later today.

Mephisto

September 14th, 2001, 02:07 PM

Sorry, dogscoff, I didn't know that you already where quoting/replaying to me otherwise I would not have deleted my mail.
Right after my post I saw a comment that this comment was aired 25 years ago and as I didn't wanted to piss people off I did delete my post. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 02:10 PM

HEy dogscoff rememeber that the speach was written in 1973 by Gordon Sinclair ( Canadian ).

I think that is is not the time to be taking the piss at who built what but take the post on how it was. Rich04 posted this speach so others could seek comfort in it's words.
Nothing more nothing less.

Lets leave it at that.

P.S. I am not pissed off, but felt compelled to write this.

Take care dogscoff.

Tesco

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 02:18 PM

What will happen to Echelon now? Intelligence based solely on Technology is not enough. I can see encryption being Banned ( unless their is a back door )

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

Exculcator

September 14th, 2001, 02:19 PM

Here's to remind that we really DO sympathise.

http://coldleaf.org/thankyou.htm

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 02:35 PM

"Twice in my lifetime the long arm of destiny has reached across the oceans and involved the entire life and manhood of the United States in a deadly struggle.

There was no use in saying "We don't want it; we won�t have it; our forebears left Europe to avoid these quarrels; we have founded a new world which has no contact with the old. "There was no use in that. The long arm reaches out remorselessly, and every one's existence, environment, and outlook undergo a swift and irresistible change. What is the explanation, Mr. President, of these strange facts, and what are the deep laws to which they respond? I will offer you one explanation - there are others, but one will suffice.

The price of greatness is responsibility. If the people of the United States had continued in a mediocre station, struggling with the wilderness, absorbed in their own affairs, and a factor of no consequence in the movement of the world, they might have remained forgotten and undisturbed beyond their protecting oceans: but one cannot rise to be in many ways the leading community in the civilised world without being involved in its problems, without being convulsed by its agonies and inspired by its causes.

If this has been proved in the past, as it has been, it will become indisputable in the future. The people of the United States cannot escape world responsibility. Although we live in a period so tumultuous that little can be predicted, we may be quite sure that this process will be intensified with every forward step the United States make in wealth and in power. Not only are the responsibilities of this great Republic growing, but the world over which they range is itself contracting in relation to our powers of locomotion at a positively alarming rate.

We have learned to fly. What prodigious changes are involved in that new accomplishment! Man has parted company with his trusty friend the horse and has sailed into the azure with the eagles, eagles being represented by the infernal (loud laughter) - I mean internal -combustion engine. Where, then, are those broad oceans, those vast staring deserts? They are shrinking beneath our very eyes. Even elderly Parliamentarians like myself are forced to acquire a high degree of mobility.

But to the youth of America, as to the youth of all the Britains, I say "You cannot stop." There is no halting-place at this point. We have now reached a stage in the journey where there can be no pause. We must go on. It must be world anarchy or world order."

Winston Churchill.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

Exculcator

September 14th, 2001, 02:49 PM

History shall be kind to me
for I intend to write it.

Winston Churchill.

Baron Munchausen

September 14th, 2001, 04:14 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Puke:
well, the UN likes to try, and it looks like NATO is willing to help, but i get your point. i meant to suggenst that one guy is a vigilantie, a group or community used to be called a lynch mob. when they had a sherrif at the head, instead of just a drunk farmer, they got to be called a 'possie.' Maybe they will get to be called a task force or something, when its governments getting together, but i think the concept is basically the same.

again, not that im against it. I think a war on terrorism would be great, as long as it does not go the way of ronnie ray-gun's war on terrorism. i just find the parallel interesting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if I can ever punch through the knee-jerk assumptions that any "action" has to be military retribution we might discuss a "New World Order" that really isolates nations that harbor terrorists and shares information in a coordinated way that gets the terrorists caught. I see that some of the Europeans, like Askan and Andre Lescano, understand the real problem with macho revenge actions. Dropping millions of tons of bombs on Afghanistan and other remote havens for terrorists will only kill 5 or 10 percent of the terrorists, but will definitely radicalize a new generation of suicide bombers. What we need is a real international system that can detect the preparations that go into something as large as the WTC attack. Even in the spotty news we're getting now you can see that there was a lot of preparation that would have given warning if someone was paying attention.

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 04:41 PM

Here Here Baron. I agree 100% with you.

Going in to Afghan is a mistake.

Fighting a Static war against Gurellia tatics fails. The Last 300 years have proven this point over and over. The Afghan regulars and illregulars are a well trained and well motivated force. They are experienced and no doubt will remember all the lessions they learned fighting USSR.

I feel invading Afghan is wrong.

They should not be setting up task forces but sending in Special Ops to disrupt the terrorist camps, food supply and other supplies. Keep them on the move constantly. Find a camp and naplalm it so no usable material can be gained from the destroyed camp. And do it over and over.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

dogscoff

September 14th, 2001, 04:48 PM

QUOTE:
we might discuss a "New World Order"
/QUOTE

An intresting lady on UK TV Last night on a news debate programme. SHe said a few things on this subject:

First, "globalisation". (According to her)The only countries really being globalised are the US, Canada, Europe, Australia etc. She reckons that until the process is extended to include other nations (ie truly global) then this kind of terrorism / hatred will continue. I'd like to hear more of her argument before I decide whether I agree on it. Anyone else see her on TV?

She also pointed out that this week a lot of politicians (notably Bush) have been repeatedly using the words "civilised world" in such a way as to imply that Arab countries are *not* civilised - which isn't really the case. They INVENTED civilisation.

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages (http://www.sandman43.fsnet.co.uk/se4main.htm) to generate your own code.

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 05:06 PM

The word civilized is one of the key propoganda words. As is Democracy and Freedom. It gives the World a common ground to rally behind.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

AJC

September 14th, 2001, 05:15 PM

Imagine

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

Imagine no possesions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say Im a dreamer,
but Im not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.

--John Lennon

Andr�s

September 14th, 2001, 06:03 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>First, "globalisation". (According to her)The only countries really being globalised are the US, Canada, Europe, Australia etc. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I�m from Argentina, I don�t think she included latin america among the few globalized countries she was talking about.
The fact that Baron Munchausen assumed I was european proves it doesn�t matter where I�m from.
Far way from here, our economy depends on (is managed by) the US, we are waiting to see how consequences of this incident will influence will influence international commerce and how that will affect us.

LazarusLong42

September 14th, 2001, 06:04 PM

On 11 September

Cry, O beautiful Nation!
This is your time of strife;
Into the heart of innocence
Was thrust an airborne knife.
The dagger of terror now appears
With blood up to its hilt;
The perches of eagles have hit the ground,
But they will be rebuilt.

Cry, O beautiful Nation!
This is your time of grief;
Friends and neighbors the world 'round
Are watching in disbelief.
Let flow the tears of sorrow
For the missing, for the lost;
But let not fear for tomorrow enter
Your thoughts at any cost.

Cry out, O adamant Nation!
This is your hour of strength;
The women and men who fight for you
Will go to every length.
Your flag still flies above the streets;
Liberty's light shines dear;
And all who believe in truth and right
Will surely persevere.

-- Eric Snyder II

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 06:36 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by tesco samoa:
The word civilized is one of the key propoganda words. As is Democracy and Freedom. It gives the World a common ground to rally behind.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Tesco, I agree with much of what you have said in this thread. And I do agree that we need to proceed very carefully over the next few weeks and months that we truley seek justice, and not simply revenge. But Democracy and Freedom are not simply "propoganda words".

What they truly represent to us is difficult to understand, and even harder to put into words. Many Americans even have no idea what they mean. But if we do not, it is not because we do not value them dearly. It is simply because they are so much an ingrained part of our identity, that we often take them for granted.

Geoschmo

Exculcator

September 14th, 2001, 06:48 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dogscoff:
First, "globalisation". (According to her)The only countries really being globalised are the US, Canada, Europe, Australia etc. She reckons that until the process is extended to include other nations (ie truly global) then this kind of terrorism / hatred will continue. [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhm, but globalisation is exactly that those terrorists are fighting.
They do NOT want to be globalised, they want to live in a place where there is no outside influence 'corrupting' their society .
These people have a quite different mindset than us. And they want to keep it that way.

[This message has been edited by Exculcator (edited 14 September 2001).]

Puke

September 14th, 2001, 07:02 PM

AJC, that is my favorite Lennon song. Of course, I usually stop at the first verse.

and yes, globalization is what the terrorists are fighting. yes, only first world nations are globalizing. they are globalizing INTO smaller nations where they setup sweatshops and take advantage of the local poverty. So far, it has been working really well for us, and im behind it. Of course its not all black, there are good points and benefits all around, but i wont take the time to argue that here.

and as for 'any response needs to be a violent one, involving the carpetbombing of terrorist states' (paraphrased) NO. I certainly would not mind seeing that, and i dont think it would be 100% counter productive, just oh.. 80% or so. Any response needs to leverage military, political, and economic force to completely eliminate the philosophys and ways of life that are so dyametrically opposed to western culture that the people following that set of beliefs has no recourse but to engage in guerillia (spelling?) warfare against the west. The western world has been destroying their way of life for centuries, and there is nothing they can do to stop us. they see it, and they are desperate. by comitting these acts, they are begging for their suffering to end. The cruelest thing we can do is to play 'nice guy' and only punish those directly responsible and leave the rest of the culture intact.

Its like playing SE4. your opponent has already lost, and their strength cant compair to yours. you have been at war for hundreds of turns, and you push them into a corner and force surrender. but you leave them with nothing and no hope of striking back, yet you are the 'nice guy' and you dont finish them off. both your people hate each other, but for some screwed up moral reason, you both just sit there in some sort of cold war standoff.

dmm

September 14th, 2001, 07:30 PM

In 1999, the adult population of the Palestinian territories was 1.4 million. Let's say that there are 2 million today. The average wage is about 5000 US$. (source: UNSCO report) So giving every adult a full year's wage would cost $10B. At the risk of sounding like an "ugly American" again, I wonder how many years worth of wages it would take to pay most Palestinians in Israeli-occupied territory to emigrate and never come back? Of course, some people wouldn't leave even for 10 years of wages, but most probably would, and that's "only" $100B. Considering that Bush has been authorized to spend $40B to combat terrorism, I wonder if simple bribery wouldn't be cheaper? Maybe it's my immigrant roots, but I'd leave the US for some other English-speaking country if someone paid my wife and I 20 years worth of wages. What about the rest of you? Am I a money-grubbing, disloyal, ugly American slimeball, or would some of you emigrate with me? And what about Palestinians? Is this plan insane, or stupid, or inspired?

mac5732

September 14th, 2001, 07:32 PM

In regards to global orgainization to combat terroism, you already have one organization but it is limited in power. This is Interpol.
It would be easy to expand and increase their power but all or at least majority of nations would have to agree and fund it. This has good possibilities. Problem is getting nations to fund and back it. Possibly put under the UN, also s World Court for World criminals, IE terroists, international drug lords etc. We already have one for Genocide why not for international criminals? As far as dropping bombs everywhere, I agree that you use small elite reaction forces, find their bases & camps, hit them and keep hitting them where ever they set up. Keep them on the run, no rest, this keeps innocent casualty rates down at least and puts pressure on them, Black ball and blockade any nation that hides & supports them, put international pressure on these countries..

just some ideas mac

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 07:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by askan:
Ugh.
Isn't that what is happening now in the US?
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth is just going to leave the world with alot of blind, hungry people.

I don't want my country to get dragged into a war (and my pathetic excuse of a leader will be there lapping at George W's feet). I want the US to lead by example. To act with good sense and not get alot of innocent people killed because alot of innocent people were killed.

Is that too much to ask?

Askan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'm sorry Askan, but like it or not your country is in the war. Every country in the world is "in the war". Because this isn't simply a war between the U.S. and Bin Ladin's organization, or even between the U.S. and Afganistan.

This truly was an attack on the world, despite what our own over zealous superficial press likes to say. The sheer numbers of people involved and the choice of targets and means to destroy them chosen will result in this being on of the most deadly terrorist attacks ever for several nations. Many countries have already listed numerous confirmed dead, and scores of missing among their citizens either in the airplanes or in the buildings.

And even if your country is lucky to avoid losing any of it's people, you must realize, as your leader will no doubt, that it must be stopped or it could happen in your country too.

The people that perpatrated this act do not simply hate Americans. They hate all people different than them. Do you really think that if they could remove every American from the face of the earth tommorow they would stop? No, they would find someone else to hate then, and go after them next.

Also, as far as "carpet bombing" goes. I looked back over the thread and found where I mentioned it. I don't know if I was the first one to use it, or if I was responding to somone else. But I did not mean indiscriminate carpet bombing. I was merely saying that if we have proof that Bin Laden is behind this, and the Afgan government refuses to give him up, then we will have to go in there and get him. Not with a few potshot cruise missle attacks. It will require bobming of training and support facilities. It will require troops on the ground to feret him out of hiding. It will result in the loss of many lives. Americans, Afgans, and others.

If a terrorist organization is hiding next to cilvilian areas, then some innocent lives will be lost. That happens in a war. It is tragic, but it happens.

Geoschmo

LazarusLong42

September 14th, 2001, 07:50 PM

dmm:

Yes, for most people I don't think that would do it. I wouldn't leave the USA for money. Many Palestinians wouldn't leave Palestine for money.

And sadly, even if they would, it wouldn't be an end to the conflict. The problem is thus: Israel feels the Palestinians are occupying their territories. The Palestinians reciprocate the feeling. Neither side is willing to live with the other. By definition, both sides are wrong, but they don't see it that way.

If this does turn into war--or somethign similar--there are going to be some very strange bedfellows, though. Let's say it's the Taliban/bin Laden. So, the US will suddenly be allied with the Russians and the Afghan rebels/Northern alliance--the very people we were fighting twenty years ago. Egypt and Saudi Arabia will be, by transitivity, allied with Israel.

We'll be allied with China, for goodness' sake.

Of course, there are other ramifications. If Pakistan doesn't support us, we suddenly have taken a side in the India-Pakistani war, creating further division there.

OK... enough rambling. I'm going back to work http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Eric

Exculcator

September 14th, 2001, 08:33 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Puke:

Its like playing SE4. your opponent has already lost, and their strength cant compair to yours. you have been at war for hundreds of turns, and you push them into a corner and force surrender. but you leave them with nothing and no hope of striking back, yet you are the 'nice guy' and you dont finish them off. both your people hate each other, but for some screwed up moral reason, you both just sit there in some sort of cold war standoff.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are 100% right there and up until WWI this was the accepted norm. You loose, all mine now, tough ****, end of problem.

But then propaganda crept in. Those big wars sure needed a lot of cannon fodder. So people had to be lured in.
'We are fighting the just cause'. Freedom! Democracy! Justice! for all. These became the slogans to rally behind. And people started believing their own propaganda, even after the war was won. And it was carried on into the next war and further into the cold war. The origins of WWI had nothing to with those concepts.
You may include the American civil war here, come to think of it. How many Americans today actually believe that war was for the liberation of the black man? Quite a lot I'd think.
A sense of morale has slowly crept into warfare that might not alltogether be that healthy.The resulting idea, to treat the vanquished enemy in a 'politically correct way', has created more problems than winning a war solved.
Not finishing Saddam off was a mistake, for instance. What if after WWII the Nazi regime had been kept alive? To keep the 'political balance' in europe intact.
Soft healers do indeed create stinking wounds.

But keeping up the idea that you are the 'Good Guy' entails that you must walk on glass, not to destroy that image.
America has been walking on glass a long time now, bearing the torch high. But cracks have appeared in the image, maybe it's time to drop the pretences.
America is an empire and it controls a huge part of the world, why not admit it.
But Someone will allways be on top and we could do a lot, lot worse than being under American domination.

tesco samoa

September 14th, 2001, 08:47 PM

geoschmo

I agree with you 100%.

I was just mentioning how they are being used as a corollary and a resultant within the same sentance.

Propaganda:
The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

The thing about writting something in a forum or newsletter or email is that sometimes the meaning is lost or misinterpided.

That post was not written in the intent of producing any slanderous idea's against the pilliars that humanity is built upon.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 09:04 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Exculcator:
How many Americans today actually believe that war was for the liberation of the black man? Quite a lot I'd think.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do.

Exculcator

September 14th, 2001, 09:13 PM

Really?

Not the opposing views of being a federation of independant states and that of preserving the Union ?

Baron Munchausen

September 14th, 2001, 09:39 PM

I've picked up some interesting infomation, second hand. An acquaintance received an email from a friend in the military. He lives in New England, but the information seems to be relevant all over the country.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

I'd like you to advise friends and co-workers that if they have nothing critical to do in Boston, they should NOT go. We were just briefed, unclassified, but the message was clear. We are still "under attack" and we need to be incredibly careful. You should also keep all travel, especially commercial air travel to a minimum, as we are getting strong indications that this is no where close to being finished

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just because this specifies Boston doesn't seem to me to exclude that similar warnings are appropriate for other cities in the US. Maybe Bush isn't exaggerating. Maybe we are at war. My best guess is that this email is part of an intentional strategy to warn people by word of mouth without making big public announcements and tipping off the terrorists. Let's all be careful, and let's all spread the word.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 14 September 2001).]

Lisif Deoral

September 14th, 2001, 09:40 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by dmm:
At the risk of sounding like an "ugly American" again, I wonder how many years worth of wages it would take to pay most Palestinians in Israeli-occupied territory to emigrate and never come back?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suppose it won't work, and anyway it wouldn't be considered a "civilized" way to deal with the problem. I also suppose it'll lead to more problems sooner or later.

The Romans did something similar to Israel in 70 b.C. - with a much ruder attitude.
Well, you know what have been the consequences in the Last 1900 years, and what's happening now... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon9.gif

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 09:42 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Exculcator:
Really?

Not the opposing views of being a federation of independant states and that of preserving the Union ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Nope. It was slavery.

The southern states might have said they were leaving the Union because of the "States Rights" and all that crap. But the only "right" they cared about was the right to own slaves. If they weren't afraid, correctly or not, that Lincoln and the other northern states were planning on abolishing slavery, they wouldn't have cared if you called it a "Union" or a "Federation of States" or a "Grand Kegger".

We stopped being a federation of States when the constitution was signed. If that was the issue, they would have seceded then. The fact is they didn't, until it became apparent that slavery was going to end.

And whether or not the federal government would have fought to preserve the Union regardless of slavery is irrelevant really. Becasue if it weren't for slavery, there would have not been a reason for fighting to preserve the Union, because the Union wouldn't have split.

Geoschmo

LazarusLong42

September 14th, 2001, 09:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
I do.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, Geo, I have to (generally) agree with Exculcator on this one. There were several struggles involved in the Civil War, only one of which was slavery vs. liberation of Blacks.

Exculcator has another: the age-old problem of Union vs. Liberty, as expressed in a set of quotes from a gathering involving several prominent political figures of the late 1820's:

"The Federal Union, it must be preserved." -- Andrew Jackson

"The Union, next to our Liberty, the most dear." -- John C. Calhoun

"Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable." -- Daniel Webster

Jackson and Calhoun were both from the South (and Webster from Vermont or something like that), but while Webster's idea may be felt by a majority of us now, Jackson and Calhoun's ideologies previaled, Jackson's taking hold more in the North, Calhoun's in the South.

But that's not all of it. There was also the matter of commerce. Let's face it, the North may have condemned slavery, but they sure didn't mind the money that flowed their way. They had all the manufacturing, and therefore the money from raw goods--cotton, tobacco, and other plantation materials--that flowed into the South (partially from the North, partially from Europe) eventually made it to the North, where finished goods were made.

The South kept Blacks as slaves; the North kept the South, commercially, as slaves. The South knew that without slaves to do the work, they would be destitute, but the North could get their raw materials elsewhere. When Lincoln, who did run with an anti-slavery plank in his platform, was elected, the South was horrified and knew that if they remained in the Union they would certainly become completely dependent on the North.

So they seceded. Which could have been an amicable situation, actually: the South would have abolished slavery, at a guess, near 1890-1900, finding the Last strains of the Industrial Revolution more useful for production of raw materials. But, they weren't initially friendly to the North, and the North's partial dependence on the South for raw materials made the North angry when they simply couldn't get them.

So the North blockaded Charleston and other major ports to stop trade between the new Confederacy and Britain/Europe, in an attempt to force them to trade with the Union. Frankly, even now that'd be considered an act of war. Follow Harper's Ferry, Fort Sumter, Civil War.

OK. I paid too much attention in history class... and probably still have stuff wrong. Feel free to discuss.

Eric

LazarusLong42

September 14th, 2001, 09:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
We stopped being a federation of States when the constitution was signed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to disagree with that one, strongly. We stopped being a federation of States in a slow, leak process, as the Federal government slowly took over more and more powers from the States and the people--powers that are supposedly reserved to the States and the People in the 9th and 10th Amendments to said Constitution.

These are the two Amendments that most courts seem to ignore.

While I'll agree the leak process began at the signing of the Constitution, it's taken quite a while, and there have been major bursts of activity driving us toward a single Union: the Depression and the New Deal which was implemented for the express purpose of getting us out of said Depression (and subsequently didn't work); before that certain policies instituted under Wilson, and before that Reconstruction. By the time we got to the Lyndon Johnson administration, the leak process was mostly finished and even Republicans pretty much accepted that there were no longer such things as "States" except in a few areas such as education.

The LBJ administration eliminated "States" as far as education goes. And so forth.

(OK, why is rambling about silly political ideologies of the past soothing to me? http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif)

Eric

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 10:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by LazarusLong42:
...But that's not all of it. There was also the matter of commerce. Let's face it, the North may have condemned slavery, but they sure didn't mind the money that flowed their way. They had all the manufacturing, and therefore the money from raw goods--cotton, tobacco, and other plantation materials--that flowed into the South (partially from the North, partially from Europe) eventually made it to the North, where finished goods were made.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>All very true. For the first hundred years of our country there was a dirty little aggrement where everybody got paid and everybody stayed happy. I am not by any means saying the North was innocent. But by the 1860's attitudes in the North had shifted away from this and towards abbolishing slavery. This fact is what caused the rift between the two. All the pretty words about liberty and unity were just a way for "educated" men of the time to discuss the issue of the day without having to face the glaring truth.

The argument boiled down to it's core was simply, "Do I have the right to own another human being as property." The majority in South felt YES strongly enough to quit the country. The majority of the North felt strongly NO storngly enough to go to war to stop them.

Of course there are many other reasons why one individual or group or another picked one side or the other. Not everybody in the North cared a whit about the slaves. And not everybody in the South depended on slavery. Many would have been perfectly happy to allow it to be abolished at the time. And I don't doubt you are correct it would have been within a few more decades at any rate.

But my point is if you are looking for a single, defining cause for the American Civil War, it has to be the abolishion of slavery. It is the only one of the numerous issues of the day that if removed from the table, could have prevented the conflict from ever starting. It is the point about which all the other disagreements revolved.

Geoschmo

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 10:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by LazarusLong42:
I have to disagree with that one, strongly. We stopped being a federation of States in a slow, leak process, as the Federal government slowly took over more and more powers from the States and the people--powers that are supposedly reserved to the States and the People in the 9th and 10th Amendments to said Constitution.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Of course a lot of this is a purely acedemic argument about semantics and definitions. But the "Articles of Confederation" Gave almost no power to the congress. Really the only thing the congress could do was mediate desputes between the various states, and make treaties and wars with other nations.

"Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever."

Once we gave up on that and signed the Constitution we went from being a close federation of independant, sovereign, nation states, and became a single nation, or union.

To be sure over time there has been a "leak" of the balance of power from the decentralized states towards a more massive federal burocracy. And that's not alway's been a good thing by any stretch.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>(OK, why is rambling about silly political ideologies of the past soothing to me? )<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I don't know. But I feel it too. This has been very theraputic. Almost like making my mind "think" for a while has allowed my emotions to take a break. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Geoschmo

LazarusLong42

September 14th, 2001, 10:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
But the "Articles of Confederation" Gave almost no power to the congress. Really the only thing the congress could do was mediate desputes between the various states, and make treaties and wars with other nations.
Once we gave up on that and signed the Constitution we went from being a close federation of independant, sovereign, nation states, and became a single nation, or union.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, yes, absolutely... the AoC created about as loose a federation as one could create. I hadn't really thought of the states as being "nation-states" under the AoC, but I suppose that's probably a better definition. The AoC was barely more binding than, say, the NATO charter, or the EU charter. Though certainly much more than the UN charter, which is as binding as Kleenex. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Eric

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 11:10 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by LazarusLong42:
Oh, yes, absolutely... the AoC created about as loose a federation as one could create. I hadn't really thought of the states as being "nation-states" under the AoC, but I suppose that's probably a better definition. The AoC was barely more binding than, say, the NATO charter, or the EU charter. Though certainly much more than the UN charter, which is as binding as Kleenex. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Eric<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, I would say it is very close to the NATO charter. Although if a NATO member wants to go to war with another country we won't really stop them, unless it's another NATO member. But they probably would get kicked out eventually if they were the aggressor.

I wonder how different things would be today if we had kept the AoC?

I think the EU is really just an economic agreement isn't it. Kind of a T&R treaty in SEIV terms? I don't really know though. I didn't think it had any military ramifications at all.

Geoschmo

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 11:15 PM

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

The sound you hear is the rest of the forum being put to sleep by Laz and Geo's facinating discussion about 18th and 19th century politics.

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon12.gif

Alpha Kodiak

September 14th, 2001, 11:52 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

The sound you hear is the rest of the forum being put to sleep by Laz and Geo's facinating discussion about 18th and 19th century politics.

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon12.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know, I think it is more interesting than the incessant droning of the talking heads on TV and radio. While this is truly the cataclysmic news story, there really isn't much new to say right at the moment, but that doesn't stop the news from saying the same thing over and o v e r aga...zzzzz

Uh, sorry. Where was I? Oh yeah, maybe I'm just insensitive, but it seems like we should at least start to get back to some sense of normalcy. They can always interrupt with real news. Of course, there is little that is worthwhile on TV normally anyway, so maybe this is an improvement.

Oh well, time to go back to sle... I mean work.

geoschmo

September 14th, 2001, 11:58 PM

Oh man are you right about that.

The only thing worse than hearing the same thing over and over is hearing all these really specific, detailed reports, that turn out to be absolute bunk. That has been happening TOO much the past 48 hours.

I guess the new press rule is if you don't have anything new to say, make something up.

Geoschmo

Lisif Deoral

September 15th, 2001, 12:17 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by geoschmo:
I think the EU is really just an economic agreement isn't it. Kind of a T&R treaty in SEIV terms? I don't really know though. I didn't think it had any military ramifications at all.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mainly economic, but not just that. There are also some political obligations and some attempts to coordinate foreign and internal (social) policies.
There's no military involvement - although most of the member states are also members of the NATO.

By the way, there's something I never understood about the American Civil War - had (has?) a member state the right to quit the Union? IOW, had the remaining member states the right to "restore order" through use of force?

Baron Munchausen

September 15th, 2001, 12:25 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Lisif:
Mainly economic, but not just that. There are also some political obligations and some attempts to coordinate foreign and internal (social) policies.
There's no military involvement - although most of the member states are also members of the NATO.

By the way, there's something I never understood about the American Civil War - had (has?) a member state the right to quit the Union? IOW, had the remaining member states the right to "restore order" through use of force?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the central issue of the Civil War, actually. It doesn't explicitly say in the Constitution that a state may withdraw from the union after joining, but it doesn't say that a state may NOT either. Many say that the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not explicitly given to the Federal govt. for the people or the states, gives a state the implicit right to cecede from the union. This would make the war by the North illegal, but since the North won it got to write the history (and law) books.

shonae

September 15th, 2001, 12:48 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Lisif:
Mainly economic, but not just that. There are also some political obligations and some attempts to coordinate foreign and internal (social) policies.
There's no military involvement - although most of the member states are also members of the NATO.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're forgetting that is changing now. Originally it was just an economic agreement but it is now gradually gaining more powers from the member countries. Also an European Defense/Task force is in the process of being formed using soldiers from the EU countries (mainly from Britain and France I think) and there has been talk of the EU becoming a United States of Europe.

Personally I wouldn't be surprised if by the end of the 21st century it came into being!

Ciao
Shonae

geoschmo

September 15th, 2001, 12:57 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
That's the central issue of the Civil War, actually. It doesn't explicitly say in the Constitution that a state may withdraw from the union after joining, but it doesn't say that a state may NOT either. Many say that the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not explicitly given to the Federal govt. for the people or the states, gives a state the implicit right to secede from the union. This would make the war by the North illegal, but since the North won it got to write the history (and law) books.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's one way to look at it. I think a more valid argument is that by seceding from the Union, the southern states were not exercising their "implicit" rights maintained by the 10th amendment, but actually abrogating the "explicit" rights given to the federal government in all the other articles and amendments that they agreed to when the Constitution was ratified.

Constitutionally the only way the South could secede and form there own confederation was by a recommendation of amendment abolishing the current Constitution would have to be made by 3/4ths of the state legislatures of the various states, which would then have to be ratified by 4/5 fifths of the state legislatures. (Article V)

They would then be free to decide to join a new confederation, stay in the greater union after ratifying a new constitution, or form their own sovereign, independent nation.

Of course they did not have the required number of states to do this, so the result was an illegal action and as such the Federal government had the right to take the action it did.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by LazaruLong42:
So the North blockaded Charleston and other major ports to stop trade between the new Confederacy and Britain/Europe, in an attempt to force them to trade with the Union. Frankly, even now that'd be considered an act of war. Follow Harper's Ferry, Fort Sumter, Civil War.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Constitionally the Confederate States of America was a non-entity, and the people in and defending it were actually still American citizens bound by the laws set forth in the U.S. Constitution. In that sense it was not actually a war at all but a police action.

Of course that Last point is semantics. The point is moot now.

Geoschmo

[This message has been edited by geoschmo (edited 15 September 2001).]

[This message has been edited by geoschmo (edited 15 September 2001).]

Kimball

September 15th, 2001, 01:01 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Puke:
isnt it the same tune as "god save the queen?"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Americanized tune is "My Country tis of Thee" So, they really were playing the National Anthem...I knew I wasn't nuts http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

capnq

September 15th, 2001, 01:04 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>isnt it the same tune as "god save the queen?"The Americanized tune is "My Country tis of Thee" So, they really were playing the National Anthem<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>An amusing bit of trivia: The tune to "The Star Spangled Banner" was taken from a British drinking song called "The Halls of Anacreon".

Which makes a lot of sense, actually; you almost have to be drunk to try to hit that high note towards the end. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon12.gif

------------------
Cap'n Q

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

[This message has been edited by capnq (edited 15 September 2001).]

AJC

September 15th, 2001, 01:22 AM

I thought some of you may find this article on Afghanistan interesting - especially us Americans.

September 13, 2001

THE AFGHANS
Taliban Plead for Mercy to the Miserable in a Land of Nothing
By BARRY BEARAK

ABUL, Afghanistan, Sept. 12 � If there are Americans clamoring to bomb Afghanistan back to the Stone Age, they ought to know that this nation does not have so far to go. This is a post-apocalyptic place of felled cities, parched land and downtrodden people.

The fragility of this country was part of the message the Taliban government conveyed in a plea for restraint issued late tonight.
It said in part, "We appeal to the United States not to put Afghanistan into more misery because our people have suffered so much."

Whatever Afghanistan's current cataclysm, its next one seems to require little time to overtake it. Wars fought by sundry protagonists have gone on now for 22 consecutive years, a remorseless drought for 4. Since 1996, most of the nation has been ruled by Taliban mullahs whose vision of the world's purest Islamic state has at least as much to do with controlling social behavior as vouchsafing social welfare.

The accused terrorist Osama bin Laden has found a home here, angering much of the world. In 1998, America fired a volley of more than 70 cruise missiles at guerrilla training camps reportedly operated by the Saudi multimillionaire. Now, there seems to be the prospect of another barrage, with Afghan hospitality to the same man as the cause.

As fear of an American attack mounted, the Taliban's senior spokesman in Kandahar, Abdul Hai Mutmain, called the few foreign reporters here to issue the statement, which in part defended Mr. bin Laden:

"These days, Osama bin Laden's name has become very popular and to an extent it has become a symbol. These days, even to the common people, Osama bin Laden's name is associated with all controversial acts. Osama bin Laden does not have such capabilities. We still hope sanity prevails in the United States. We are confident that if a fair investigation is carried out by American authorities, the Taliban will not be found guilty of involvement in such cowardly acts."

The statement also said, "Killing our leaders will not help our people any. There is no factory in Afghanistan that is worth the price of a single missile fired at us. It will simply increase the mistrust between the people in the region and the United States."

Whatever else there is to say about this entreaty, one part that is indisputably true is that this land-locked, ruggedly beautiful nation is in absolute misery.

Here in Kabul, the capital, roaming clusters of widows beg in the streets, their palms seemingly frozen in a supplicant pose. Withered men pull overloaded carts, their labor less costly than the price of a donkey.

Children play in vast ruins, their limbs sometimes wrenched away by remnant land mines. The national life expectancy, according to the central statistics office, has fallen to 42 for males and 40 for females.

The prolonged drought has sent nearly a million Afghans � about 5 percent of the population � on a desperate flight from hunger. Some have gone to other Afghan cities, others across the border. More than one million are "at risk of starvation," according to the United Nations.

Famine is the catastrophe Afghans are used to hearing about. Few yet know of the threat of an American reprisal. The Taliban long ago Banned television, and the lack of electricity keeps most people from listening to radio.

The nation's 100 or so foreign aid workers suffer no such telecommunications handicaps, however, and today many of them began to flee their adopted home, fearing either the havoc of American bombs or the wrath of subsequent Afghan outrage.

Around noon, a special United Nations flight evacuated the first of the expatriates. The remaining foreigners are expected to leave on Thursday, as will three, and perhaps all four, of the American parents here to observe the trial of their children, among eight foreign aid workers accused by the Taliban of preaching Christianity.

As foreigners left, the Taliban took unusual precautions: they began searching every vehicle entering government compounds. Visitors were carefully frisked.

But however much the Taliban hierarchy was beginning to fret, streets and bazaars were a picture of normality. Word has spread slowly about the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. And even when everyday Afghans heard the news, there were no accompanying video images to sear the horror into their memories. Personal conversations only carried the dull stimuli of abstract words: hijacked planes and collapsed buildings.

Khair Khana, a man selling fertilizer in a market, knew just a bit about the attack. He thought a plane had crashed into the White House. And he considered the perpetrators, whoever they are, to be "enemies of God," though he also felt "Americans should look into their hearts and minds about why someone would kill themselves and others" in such a way.

He had not thought much about an American retaliation against Afghanistan. When he did consider it, standing in a ramshackle collection of stalls, he shrugged and said: "Americans are powerful and can do anything they like without us stopping them."

Nearby, a tailor, Abdul Malik, saw God's justice in America's pain because, as he understands it, the United States has armed the Afghan resistance to fight against the Taliban. "So they at least now know how it feels in their own country," he said.

As for Mr. bin Laden, the tailor considered judgment of him to be God's affair. "If Osama is Islam's enemy, he should be gotten rid of," he said. "But if he is a good Muslim and wants Islam to prosper � and if America wants him dead � then we hope he destroys America."

The common people of Afghanistan are often circumspect with their opinions. As one man said today: "Nobody here talks wholeheartedly any more; it can be dangerous."

The Taliban are credited with improving safety. They disarmed the population, they put an end to banditry. But the security has come at a steep price.

Women have been forced into head-to-toe gowns known as burqasand evicted from schools and the workplace. Men are obligated to wear long beards or face jail. Banned are musical instruments, chessBoards, playing cards, nail polish and neckties. Cheers at soccer matches are restricted to "Allah-u-akbar,"or God is great. Freedom of speech has bowed to religious totalitarianism.

Various Taliban police forces patrol the streets. Today, in a derelict building that is used as a precinct office, one 25-year-old constable sat on the floor beneath a single dangling light bulb. His name was Muhammad Anwar. He had heard something about the attack in America but he had no idea how many were killed or what cities were involved. Indeed, it seemed unlikely that he had ever heard of New York.

"Attacks like these are not a good thing because Muslims live all over the world and Muslims may have been killed," Mr. Anwar said hesitantly. By his reckoning, Americans were enemies of Afghanistan, as were Jews and Christians. He thought about this a bit more and retracted it partially. "There must have been all kinds of people in the building, not just bad Jews but good Jews, not just bad Christians but good ones."

He remembered something he had learned in his madrassa, or religious school. "It is un-Islamic to kill innocent people," he said.

Puke

September 15th, 2001, 04:43 AM

well, i was actually working today.. well, after noon anyway, before that i was drinking.. in any event, i am sure that everyone was glad for my absense. Tho late, I must side with LL42 100%.

and just when i was begining to think that everyone was ignoring me in the hopes that i would go away, to the person that said:

"America has been walking on glass a long time now, bearing the torch high. But cracks have appeared in the image, maybe it's time to drop the pretences.
America is an empire and it controls a huge part of the world, why not admit it.
But Someone will allways be on top and we could do a lot, lot worse than being under American domination."

i have to thank, good to see someone who shares my point of view.

Lastly, im hearing alot about American solidarity these days, but whenver i try to merge on the freeway, everyone is like "screw you, you tryin-to-merge-guy."

Baron Munchausen

September 15th, 2001, 05:56 AM

Geoschmo,

Where is this 'process' for arranging secession that you described given in the Constitution? I'm fairly familiar with it, and I don't recall any such process. I think you are quoting something written AFTER the war by a Northern law scholar. I.O.W., Victor's Justification. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Therefore, since the power to GRANT a state the right to secede is not explicitly delegated to the Federal government NOR explicitly forbidden to the states in the Constitution, it is retained by the states themselves. If not for the problem of slavery, the North would have had no justification for its aggression against the South. Actually, since the South seceded before any legislation against slavery could be passed, the North had no legal justification for the war. You must appeal to 'extra legal' moral principles to justify it.

Some people claim, as has been discussed here, that this was merely an excuse and the North just didn't want to lose territory and so political/economic power. But if you examine the history, yes, the war really was about slavery. The Dredd Scott decision threw the Northern states into a panic because it meant slavery could spread everywhere. The Republican party as formed and the Whig Party torn apart. The Republicans got a President into office on their first try after the Dredd Scott decision, Abraham Lincoln, and his platform included the abolition of slavery. As you have noted already, this is the one issue that would have defused the whole situation if it was removed. Most Northerners were determined to end it, and the most Southerners were determined not to let it be ended.

In the long interim between election day and the old inauguration day (March 4th) the various states of the Confederacy decided to secede rather than face the difficult fight in Congress and the courts that they might well lose. They fully realized that they would have had questionable legitimacy if they attempted secession AFTER losing the legal battle over slavery. It's too bad Lincoln chose "political expediency" and didn't outlaw slavery by fiat until he absolutely had to, but he was deeply committed to "due process of law" and wanted to abolish slavery by proper legal proceedings. Have you ever read the Emancipation Proclamation? It does NOT free all slaves! It only freed slaves in the states that were rebelling. This was to prevent Great Britain from intervening in the war. Kentuckians kept their slaves until the 13th Amendment was passed. This is in keeping with Lincoln's principles. Since they did not rebel but respected the law, he wanted to treat them properly under the law. The really firebrand abolitionists felt betrayed, of course, and the controversy has never really ended to this day. Many people still claim the war was "not about slavery" largely because of this distinction that Lincoln made -- and ignore the huge historical record of the election debates of the time.

Your Last line is the most important. Yes, the point is moot now. A latin saying discussed a long time ago in this forum comes to mind. Inter arma leges silent. In the face of arms the law is silent.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 15 September 2001).]

geoschmo

September 15th, 2001, 12:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Geoschmo,

Where is this 'process' for arranging secession that you described given in the Constitution? I'm fairly familiar with it, and I don't recall any such process. I think you are quoting something written AFTER the war by a Northern law scholar. I.O.W., Victor's Justification. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Baron, there is no "process for arrnging seccesion" given in the constitution. What I was describing in my post was the process for amendment that would have to have been gone through legally to annul the Constitution as laid out in Article V.

Any part of the Constitution, or all of it for that matter, that was originally written can be removed, or rewritten if the process set forth in Article V is followed.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Therefore, since the power to GRANT a state the right to secede is not explicitly delegated to the Federal government NOR explicitly forbidden to the states in the Constitution, it is retained by the states themselves.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Wrong. By seceding from the Union, the southern states were actually in violation of Article X, because they were trying to take away all the powers specifically delegated to the United tates by the Constitution, as set forth in all the other Articles before it.

Article X was not an "out clause". It didn't and doesn't give any state the right to leave the Union. It doesn't even mention "rights", because States don't have rights. People have rights. States have powers.

Now, if your argument is that the people of the south have a inalienable human right to stand up and say "You no longer represent me. I am forming a new country." I can't disagree with you. That's outside of the bounds of the Constitution. But if they do that, they don't have the right under the Constitution to take the State with them.
That is part of the United States, unless removed from it by an act of Amendment to the Constitution.

Geoschmo

CNCRaymond

September 15th, 2001, 12:18 PM

My mother found this site, take a moment and look at it. Look at the picture with the circle in it.

God Bless The USA (http://www.angelfire.com/mt/englishlisa/tributetoFriendsFamilyandVictims.htm)

tesco samoa

September 15th, 2001, 02:56 PM

And if you go here http://artbell.com/letters21.html
you can see the devil ( as we all know has 2 horns a tail and what looks like a broken wrench)

Now I know I am going to draw rath here. But come on. Stuff like this really gets under my skin. It's horrible to look at these pictures. But even worse for people to take these pictures of pain and suffering and change them like they would change any other pictures.

Sorry just really upsets me.

No offence.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

CNCRaymond

September 15th, 2001, 04:56 PM

I thought it looked like fire to me, but nevertheless, people are entitled to their opinions. I thought it was a nice site, and passed it along. I am not making any judgments about the person who "saw" something, for that would be in bad taste, and despite what has happened, if seeing something that is or is not there helps him to heal, then so be it.

[This message has been edited by CNCRaymond (edited 15 September 2001).]

Cyrien

September 15th, 2001, 05:43 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Baron Munchausen:
Geoschmo,

Abraham Lincoln, and his platform included the abolition of slavery. As you have noted already, this is the one issue that would have defused the whole situation if it was removed. Most Northerners were determined to end it, and the most Southerners were determined not to let it be ended.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was going to post something earlier but the darn thing crashed and I lost everything I had typed after being close to completion but I feel a need to correct you here.

Lincoln did NOT run on an Abolition platform. He and many others felt that Abolition, the belief that all slavery everywhere should be abolited by law in all states and territories in the US, was unconstitutional... as it was due to the fact that it was protected in the Constitution in several locations. This meant that nothing short of an amendment could end slavery and of course the Southern states while lower in population in the house still had equal numbers in the Senate.

This brings us to Lincolns party platform. His was the Free Soil Platform. Under this slavery would be Banned from the Territories and not the States. In this way they hoped to lead slavery to a "natural death" as eventually the territories became free states and eventually would go to the Senate and gain a majority capable of passing an amendment. In point of fact the idea that such a law as Free Soil would be passed was rather slim and remote based on the fact that the South DID have a strong holding in the Senate. The Civil War was largely due to paranoia.

And just to be complete here the spark that set it all off was the Mexican American War and the new territories it brought into the US, which rendered all the old half measures and bargains on how to divide the US between slave and free mute and obsolete as they didn't deal with that area.

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 15 September 2001).]

Baron Munchausen

September 15th, 2001, 06:00 PM

Geoschmo,

Well, here we have the same disagreement more than a century after the war is over. Amendment X is in plain English, I don't see how you can misinterpret it. I suppose this issue will come up again, as the Federal government grows more and more tyrranical some states are likely to secede again one day, though not in the immediate future with this crisis. I expect some of the Western states to try before this century is over, though.

Here's an interesting test: If the issue had NOT been slavery, if there were no slaves in the South, do you think the North would have fought the Civil War to keep those states in the Union? I don't think so.

Cyrien,

I was not aware that slavery was "protected" anywhere in the Constitution. The only mention that I was aware of was the "three-fifths compromise" that made slaves count as three people for every five slaves in the calculation of population for representation. I would hardly call that "protection". Where else is slavery mentioned?

Ok, I didn't have an actual copy of Lincoln's platform so I didn't know the legal niceties of it. But anyway, he was definitely out to end slavery if by a more gradual means than directly outlawing it. Some have held otherwise because of his legal maneuvers around Emancipation.

Finally, though, I'd hardly call the Mexican War the 'spark'. More than a decade passed before the war broke out. The new territories increased the pressure, but it was the Dred Scott decision that shattered the political landscape. John Brown's raid didn't help, either, of course.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 15 September 2001).]

Cyrien

September 15th, 2001, 06:49 PM

Article I
Section 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

Article IV
Section 2 No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

In addition to the mentioned three fifths clause.

While not explicitly or directly protected in the Constitution (beyond 1808 that is) though many politicians of the time argued that it was protected by the ratification of the Constitution by those States at the time having signed it being under Slavery and thus recieving a protection from it in addition to several clauses related to property and trade and other prohibitions that could be viewed as directly affecting slavery due to the argument they are essential to the Economy of the South and that by going the route of abolition it would show trade preference to the North.

No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one state, be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another.

In such ways was it argued that the Constitution directly protected the rights of the Slave states. In any case this does not in any way affect the historical accuracy of what Lincoln ran under and what the Republican Party of the time supported, which was NOT abolition but Free Soil which would eventually and slowly lead to abolition.

EDITED

The 10th Amendment is not seen today as limiting the authority of the federal government where the exercise of its powers might interfere with those of the states. The reverse was the case, however, from the time that Roger Brooke Taney became (1836) chief justice of the Supreme Court until a century later. During that time, in famous cases such as Collector v. Day (1871), Hammer v. Dagenhart (1918), and Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States (1935), the 10th Amendment had been cited to curtail powers of Congress.

[This message has been edited by Cyrien (edited 15 September 2001).]

tesco samoa

September 15th, 2001, 07:07 PM

Damn. EDIT++<Contenintal>(Spelling) is going to lay off 12000 people.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

[This message has been edited by tesco samoa (edited 16 September 2001).]

Baron Munchausen

September 15th, 2001, 07:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Article I
Section 9. The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each person.

Article IV
Section 2 No person held to service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, you never know when you might learn something. I can now see how the Dred Scott decision came about. The Missouri Compromise really was unconstitutional. It's interesting that Article 4, Section 2 was not totally "superseded" by the 13th Amendment. They merely outlawed 'involuntary' servitude. You could still find situations where that could be applied in law today.

And I find it interesting that Amendment X was interpreted as I suggest during the period when the Civil War was fought.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 15 September 2001).]

Taqwus

September 15th, 2001, 07:17 PM

Ah, foobar -- it's now widely reported that Masood's family has confirmed his death resulting from injuries caused at a press conference a week (?) or so ago -- two people with a bomb in their camera got in by posing as journalists.

FYI, Masood was, perhaps, the most important leader in unifying the Afghan anti-Taliban opposition forces, which had been highly fragmented in the interval between the withdrawal of the Soviet Union and the sudden appearance of the Taliban movement. His coalition only controls an estimated 5% of the country, but if the US were to get off the fence and actively support an anti-Taliban faction (rather than mere verbal criticism and lack of diplomatic recognition, while watching them take over), or go further and attempt to install its own government, Masood would have been a logical choice for a major participant.

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

Baron Munchausen

September 15th, 2001, 07:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by tesco samoa:
Damn. UA is going to lay off 12000 people.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, the consequences of this attack are going to be very real. People are now afraid to travel and will only do so when necessary, at least for a while. The whole airline industry is facing collapse. Bush has put on a decent 'brave face' for these first few days, but he's really going to have his leadership abilities tested keeping things together.

What worries me is this is also a "propoganda coup" for the terrorists. They will now be 10 times more popular among the radicalized portion of the Islamic populations and be able to attract more recruits and money. I hope the non-radical governments will not be intimidated and will cooperate to stop them.

September 15th, 2001, 07:38 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by tesco samoa:
Damn. UA is going to lay off 12000 people.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And Ansett Australia Airways here in Aust just went over the top, that's 16000 jobs gone. One year ago there were 4 big airlines flying domestic routes here, one year later 2 were gone... And that marks the third large corporation going broke this year I think, after One Tel and HIH. Time to talk about voting out the current government!

Baron Munchausen

September 15th, 2001, 07:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- Two men believed to have been planning an attack on American interests in Europe have been charged in Belgium with possession of weapons of war.

Prosecutors said on Saturday that the two men charged face four separate counts, but they would not say what the other charges were.

The men, who were arrested on Thursday, were members of a radical Muslim group, said Fabienne Laduron, spokeswoman for Brussels prosecutor's office.

She said they were not ruling out a connection with Osama bin Laden.

The men were taken into custody in co-ordination with Netherlands authorities, who arrested four others in Rotterdam on Friday.

Police were analysing documentation that indicated the men were planning on attacking American interests in Europe.

France is sending two magistrates who specialise in terror cases to Brussels on Monday to consult on the case.

A French radio station, Europe 1, reported that the American embassy in Paris was a target. Laduron could not confirm that report.

One of the men arrested in Brussels was Tunisian, and the other was a Belgian national of North African descent.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is getting out of hand. If even naturalized citizens of Western nations are turning into agents of the terrorists we're in big trouble.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 15 September 2001).]

disabled

September 15th, 2001, 11:08 PM

For those of you who jumped off topic and argued about the southern rebellion back in the 1860's, The US Consitution is a binding contracts between the states. Attempting to leave is a breach of the contract and it is stated under the powers of the Federal Constitution that it can 'supress revolts'

In addition, it is the right of the people, not the states, to overthrow illegal, immoral, and severaly corrupt governments and replace it with a new one. However, the South had no base for this argument as they were the ones trying to prevent thier immoral and illegal state governments intact.

That is why the 14th amendment Federalized the Bill of Rights, because the states kept abusing the Bill of Rights.

[ June 13, 2003, 07:09: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

tesco samoa

September 16th, 2001, 05:46 AM

Hey every one .

I just wanted to let everyone know that I went to a wedding today it it was nice seeing an event that shaped the world for the better.

I feel that I will get a good sleep tonight for the first time in a while.

Even the food was good. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

I hope the rest of you have a good night or day and I hope this post finds you all in better spirits and good health.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

disabled

September 16th, 2001, 03:42 PM

What ever those people thought they could do by striking at America's heart has horribly backfired. They've united this country in a way that only war can and now... well... now they have sealed thier fate

[ June 13, 2003, 07:09: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

Taqwus

September 16th, 2001, 08:08 PM

One can see a few possibly intended effects.

The first is psychological shock. Apparently, quite a few citizens were unaware of the possibility of foreign terrorism hitting U.S. soil (by which I mean Stateside; embassies are nominally U.S. sovereign territory and have been hit before). This shock is undoubtably going to cause some to wonder whether the U.S. should revise its foreign policy by, say, pulling out of the Middle East -- withdrawing support for, say, Saudi Arabia and Israel, for instance, in the name of peace. With this president and this foreign policy staff, this seems, er, unlikely to actually happen, but if there is a seemingly endless series of incidents against which the three-letter-agencies seem helpless the penduluum *could* swing.

Another effect is going to be unwarranted rage against American Arabs, and anybody that seemingly *looks* like an Arab -- e.g. Sikhs with their turbans. Some footage of anti-Arab riots, perhaps some mosques on fire or a few shootings, and that's new material for recruitment videos. Likewise, if the military response, assuming it occurs, appears ineffective or even incompetent, *especially* with collateral damage, that's also golden for Al Qaeda and friends.

To a lesser extent, there may be improvements in immigration security / border controls, but these could also cause resentment among non-Americans, especially if they are seen to be more restrictive towards Middle Easterners. Can we say, "racial profiling"?

Then, there are going to be attempts at increasing security with less regard for civil liberties -- restrictions on encryption technology, for instance, have already been demanded and are much more likely to get Congressional / Presidential approval in this climate, methinks. Taken too far, these measures may increase anti-government sentiment among some.

A potentially very dangerous effect is the sudden focus on airport / airline security. Assume that these attacks were part of a coordinated plan, and that there may already be other cells already located stateside just in case *all* international travel was locked down. Locking down airports more is an obvious response, so there are at least three major options regarding next target. The first would be that civillian aircraft make fine missiles, but it's worth waiting until the current frenzy dies down -- perhaps in a few months, the country will be less vigilant.

The second approach is that the psychological impact will be increased if the FAA and other Federal entities declare that it's safe to fly, and then to strike again at the height of alleged security -- thus suggesting that the security organizations are still impotent and that the actors can strike whenever they choose.

A third approach is to use an entirely different vector; while the country scrutizines airport safety; to examine completely different approaches such as tampering with water supplies; mining harbors used by huge cruise ships; perhaps spreading anthrax or other agents among the rescue volunteers (many of whom came from across the country; and most of whom will return, thus increasing dispersal); or even noticing that the President came, in person, to one site, and therefore planning an ambush with explosives or a rifleman (who presumably would not mind being cut to pieces by return fire from the Secret Service).

It'll help to be careful at an airport, but folks should remember that those *aren't* the only possible targets.

------------------
-- The thing that goes bump in the night

tesco samoa

September 17th, 2001, 12:38 AM

Question if US is at war with those who harbour terriosts. Does this mean that US is at war with Ireland and the Sinn Finn?

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

disabled

September 17th, 2001, 01:05 AM

That is a good question. If we hold true and don't make a difference, then we'll set back the cause for irish independence and unification for a century.

But if we don't, then they'll have nothing to worry about.

All I know is that I'm fedup with 'experts' and 'ceremonies'. Time to mobilize.

Of course, war would be easier wage these days if the news meida would shut thier big flapping traps and giving away the battle plans.

[ June 13, 2003, 07:09: Message edited by: General Talashar ]

tesco samoa

September 17th, 2001, 01:21 AM

I have a strange feeling that the media is making up half their stuff.

My sister ( who works at an air port ) was telling me that you cannot even bring nail clippers any more. ANd electric stuff can only be on carry on. And if you do not have batteries or cannot plug it in to see if it works. GOne.

Just passing this info along.

Will let you all know other stuff as I find out.

------------------
L? GdX $ Fr C++ SdT T+ Sf* Tcp+ A M++ MpTM ROTS Pw+ Fq+ Nd Rp++ G+

Baron Munchausen

September 17th, 2001, 01:38 AM

Tesco,

No, that all sounds quite reasonable. Electronic equipment, even simple radios, can be converted to bombs. In fact, the timing circuits of a clock-radio are an ideal component of a bomb. Just strip out the 'radio' part and leave the timer face plate to show it ticking along and fill it with pLastique. So, it makes perfect sense to make people prove that their electronic equipment works.

This might turn out to be a more original response than I had been expecting. Have you noticed that the media reports Colin Powell making a speech every single day to the Armed Forces to "get ready"? This is not for their benefit. He can speak to them any time through direct channels. This is for the benefit of the terrorists. It's time for them to live on edge for a while. And now today they are saying 'expect something unconventional' for our response. Let's see, how about a permanent air-cover over Afghanistan, with lots of sonic-booms as they 'practice' air maneuvers and whatnot. Every so often, when a good target like a terrorist camp is spotted, a bomb or missile will drop. Could be one at a time, could be a dozen at a time, but you never know when. I hope they will be careful about civilians, of course. Special forces/commandos can be sent it to hit targets too close to civilians for conventional bombing. Training new terrorists could be difficult when you are under constant surveillance and attack. Back in the industrialized world, they can start seizing Bin Laden's assets, and capturing a terrorist cell every day or so to geneate a headline. They probably know about enough of them by now to keep that up for weeks. If they deliberately set out to make the terrorists nervous, like they ought to be since THEY are the criminals, they might succeed in turning the tables and eventually breaking their organization. The constant news of little victories could work to counter the terror effect of the recent attack, too.

[This message has been edited by Baron Munchausen (edited 17 September 2001).]