For all of you "Pacifists"

[Mr. So & So]

Re: oh, boo hoo

>>yeah, you're right. you know something else you made me realize? Ghandi went about it all wrong. Poor schmuck lived his life in vain.>i'm a big enough humanitarian to realize that there are other people on this planet besides americans. I may not be versed enough to be able to cry when they cry or empathize with most of them, but I also recognize, unlike you, that others in this world aren't cockroaches meant to be exterminated.>And you can't crush the terrorist network.>But if you actually think that if we take Bin Laden out, that all these people sending out Anthrax and bombing embassies and what have you are just going to wake up like the flying monkeys did when Dorothy threw a bucket of water on the wicked witch and say, "gee, what were we doing? hail dorothy!" and they will all get on a plane and go home and set up a Starbucks in the local market, you are sadly mistaken.>but you want to know something interesting that you may not have caught the parallels that I have....America has actually been asking Israel to pull out of the west bank. Yes, this ties into the article I posted. Why? Because one of the demands that your friend and mine has been demanding was better treatment for the Palestinians. To me, that looks like a very covert overture towards the Taliban et al as an act of diplomacy.>To me, that looks like a very covert overture towards the Taliban et al as an act of diplomacy

 

[Mr. So & So]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> and do you think there should have been a war declared by
> England when germany was interfering with their economical
> interests sometime around 1913, creating a devestated Germany,
> whose, because of their defeat and the subsequent consequences,
> inflation was so bad that it was looking like the lira, and
> creating an environment of poverty and dispair so a Hitler could
> walk right in to lead a bunch of desperate people to do what
> they did?

Ah, the lengths you will go to.

Let's say your historical information is accurate. If we are too simply apply your reductionist approach to every single issue that arises in the world, then we would be spending more time merely kicking ourselves instead of trying to realistically combat whatever threat we are given.

If only everyone did everything right and didn't cause anyone else to develop a grieance and react in an undesirable way, we might have peace for good, correct?

If only Suzanne.

And if only the British Empire had stayed out of the Middle East then we wouldn't be experience what we are experiencing.

If only....

Why do we have to upset people so and make them so angry at us, to the point of wanting to intentionally kill people?

It's pleasant to see that now, even mass murder has such "reasonable" origins in your mind.

Has it ever occurred to you that sometimes people will be violent no mattter what?

 

[jeane]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> Suzanne, give up, lay down, and rest the fingers. You truly have
> not read anything of value on Bin Laden, nor do you understand
> the inherent complexities of the conflict in general. Bin Laden
> has only recently adopted the Palestinian situation to promote
> his own agenda, which is born out of U.S. presence on holy
> ground in Saudi Arabia. He opposes Saudi Arabia as much as he
> opposes us, and is merely attempting to draw the United States
> into a holy war with the entire Islamic world. It is merely an
> attempt to rally all Muslims for his cause. Middle Eastern
> scholars accept this and acknowledge it, and you should as well.

> It seems you have been easily duped by Bin Laden propaganda.
> Trying to show a gesture of good will towards Palestinians is
> not an attempt to satiate the grievances of Bin Laden, but a
> wise and logical attempt to calm any anger that might be
> conveniently employed to lash out against America for its
> military campaign in Afghanistan.

I have to say though, and admittedly I know I will be shot down in flames for it....but......Bin Laden does show a streak of great lateral thinking.

Now before people become up in arms with this statement, please let me explain.

I am not saying

a) I condone his actions.
b) I condone or can rationalise the actions of oppressive governments such as the Taliban.
c) The US deserves terrorist action against it's country or it's people (although I don't always agree with their economic policy or the recent attacks on Afghanistan).
d) One should admire his acts and perceive Bin Laden as a kind of freedom fighter.

All I am saying is that it takes an admirable kind of intelligence to have effected the world so greatly, to think laterally, to ignite the whole world in such an emotional issue and to do it at very little cost. Once again, let me say, I don't believe he is using that intelligence wisely nor for any type of altruistic benefit. However, just imagine if he did use his powers for good and not for evil, the things that he could accomplish rather than destroy.

 

[Fabricio]

Re: oh, boo hoo

i heard yesterday jeff buckley for the first time, mr.so&so and it`s wondeful! i didn`t forget you were the guy that liked him!

> Ah, the lengths you will go to.

> Let's say your historical information is accurate. If we are too
> simply apply your reductionist approach to every single issue
> that arises in the world, then we would be spending more time
> merely kicking ourselves instead of trying to realistically
> combat whatever threat we are given.

> If only everyone did everything right and didn't cause anyone
> else to develop a grieance and react in an undesirable way, we
> might have peace for good, correct?

> If only Suzanne.

> And if only the British Empire had stayed out of the Middle East
> then we wouldn't be experience what we are experiencing.

> If only....

> Why do we have to upset people so and make them so angry at us,
> to the point of wanting to intentionally kill people?

> It's pleasant to see that now, even mass murder has such
> "reasonable" origins in your mind.

> Has it ever occurred to you that sometimes people will be
> violent no mattter what?

 

[Kathleen]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> I have to say though, and admittedly I know I will be shot down
> in flames for it....but......Bin Laden does show a streak of
> great lateral thinking.

> Now before people become up in arms with this statement, please
> let me explain.

> I am not saying

> a) I condone his actions.
> b) I condone or can rationalise the actions of oppressive
> governments such as the Taliban.
> c) The US deserves terrorist action against it's country or it's
> people (although I don't always agree with their economic policy
> or the recent attacks on Afghanistan).
> d) One should admire his acts and perceive Bin Laden as a kind
> of freedom fighter.

> All I am saying is that it takes an admirable kind of
> intelligence to have effected the world so greatly, to think
> laterally, to ignite the whole world in such an emotional issue
> and to do it at very little cost. Once again, let me say, I
> don't believe he is using that intelligence wisely nor for any
> type of altruistic benefit. However, just imagine if he did use
> his powers for good and not for evil, the things that he could
> accomplish rather than destroy.

WHAT WHAT WHAT???
"great lateral thinker" are you nuts?
It does not take a "great lateral thinker" to come up with the INSANE idea of using commercial airplanes as bombs. It scares me that there are so very many uneducated people out there. I mean @#!!! that's what spawns all this crap in the first place ignorance!!!
Please tell me that you're 10 yrs. old. That is the only excuse I can stomach for this nonsensical drivel!
Listen to what you're saying, you think this psycopath "bin @#!!!head" has admirable intelligence ARGH!!!
Please I beg you, turn off the TV and go read a F**KING book!!!

K.

 

[Mr. So & So]

Re: oh, boo hoo

I don't feel that this particular suicide mission wass necessarily that clever. We must remember that there were other past terrorist attacks on the U.S. For example the U.S.S. Cole and the prior WTC attack. As well as many botched and intercepted attacks that were planned. The prior two succeeded in creating havoc and a few casualties, but it took these failed attempts to motivate the particular planners invovled to simply go all out and abandon any sense of intricate strategy.

It is a rather obvious choice to ram a plane into any structure you desire when someone is willing to die to do so. It doesn't really require a complex sense of strategy.

Massive attacks are rather easy to carry out when many people are willing to die to get close to their target.

We all could do the same thing, but we have a general sense of sanity when it comes to protecting our own existence.

So, yes, they were clever enough to realize that we would never suspect it, and were obviously, intensely dedicated, but again, it takes little intricate planning and insight to actually ram an object into another object when someone is willing to die in the process. Especially when you are allowed to gain training and free access to the very tools you will need in the country you plan on attacking.

I'll give them credit for dedication, but -50 for past failed attempts at mass destruction, and taking the strategic easy route by way of sucide mission.

 

[Lifeguard Sleeping]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> It is a rather obvious choice to ram a plane into any structure
> you desire when someone is willing to die to do so. It doesn't
> really require a complex sense of strategy.

And yet, it hadn't been done 'til now.

> So, yes, they were clever enough to realize that we would never
> suspect it, and were obviously, intensely dedicated, but again,
> it takes little intricate planning and insight to actually ram
> an object into another object when someone is willing to die in
> the process. Especially when you are allowed to gain training
> and free access to the very tools you will need in the country
> you plan on attacking.

Though I typically stand behind most of the comments you make on this board, I have to disagree with you on this one. For such a rag-tag and ill-equipped group of terrorists, the attacks of September 11 had been planned for quite a long time, (as evidence has revealed). It took, in my opinion, quite a large degree of "intricate planning" and "insight" to simultaneously hijack four US passenger planes and, although missing half of their intended targets, reduce BOTH towers of the World Trade Center to rubble.

It may not have taken lots of money or science, but it did take a good deal of planning.

 

[Lifeguard Sleeping]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> WHAT WHAT WHAT???
> "great lateral thinker" are you nuts?
> It does not take a "great lateral thinker" to come up
> with the INSANE idea of using commercial airplanes as bombs.

Oh, come on - an insane individual would not have the mental capacity to pull off such a well-planned attack!

We get it: you don't agree with bin Laden OR his horrible acts (most of us don't). But to jump down this poster's throat for suggesting that bin Laden just *might* have enough intelligence to rally (or fool) an entire group of people to die for his beliefs is silly.

Why not take your own advice and read a "@#!!!ing book," preferably a biography or two about some of the world's cruelest dictators. You'll find that most of them possessed a good amount of intellect.

 

[suzanne]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> The atrophy of your intellect has been fully realized. To
> imagine that you can take the Gandhi ethic and apply it to every
> possible concern is absolutely ridiculous.

> Gandhi had to face imprisonment, economic sanctions, and civil
> liberties restriction, but never was he forced to face an enemy
> that was bent on enacting genocidal rampage at all costs.

you mean, like america against the Indians?

> And you know what Suzanne, when he was faced with an irrational
> enemy bent on killing him he was killed.

> Really Suzanne? And who has the military proposed to
> exterminate? Have they proposed to exterminate all Afghani
> people? If they haven’t Suzanne, and I think you know the
> answer, then you simply feeling that Al Qaeda and the Taliban
> should not be exterminated makes me feel perfectly comfortable
> judging your humanitarian nature.
> But we know what you intended by that statement.

> No one has proposed to exterminate anyone except those involved
> in the current terrorist plots. At this point you have been
> reduced to proclaiming straw man agreements to dramatize your
> point. However, I do find it curious that your concern for
> unintentional casualties outweighs those created daily by the
> Taliban, and those that have, and are intended to be created by
> Al Qaeda as well.

> Really? It’s impossible to stop the functioning of a terrorist
> network? Well, we might as well just give up, because Suzanne
> believes that it is futile to try and “crush” a terrorist
> network. Oh, but maybe she just meant through military force.

> I see, so diplomatic effort can bring down artillery sites, and
> training camps, and can route out key leaders as well, right
> Suzanne? Spending countless years attempting to sway public
> opinion that can only be swayed through a complete opposition to
> Western culture, Israel as a state, the support of strict
> Islamic regimes, full obeyance to the Koran, removing our
> presence from Saudi holy Land, and reinforcing the idea of
> terrorist grievances as being fully legit and understandable, is
> worth more of a shot than trying to, say, capture or kill those
> who are involved in plotting mass murders, and unravel the
> organizational abilities of the groups that breed them?

> Have you ever imagined that you have absolutely no idea what
> you’re talking about?

> Who has proposed that Bin Laden is our only sole target, and
> that when we do get him, if we ever do, we will somehow be
> perfectly safe? Who has proposed that we can even wipe terrorism
> out and never have to fight it again? I certainly haven’t heard
> any military officials state so. Do you know who the Taliban are
> Suzanne? Do you know what Al Qaeda is and what its intentions
> are? Do you know how they are funded and refuged?

> Maybe it’s your own short sightedness and complete
> misunderstanding of the problem that leaves you so utterly
> opposed to, what seems to be, an action period.

> After all, you think we are only trying to capture Bin Laden.

> Suzanne, give up, lay down, and rest the fingers. You truly have
> not read anything of value on Bin Laden, nor do you understand
> the inherent complexities of the conflict in general. Bin Laden
> has only recently adopted the Palestinian situation to promote
> his own agenda, which is born out of U.S. presence on holy
> ground in Saudi Arabia. He opposes Saudi Arabia as much as he
> opposes us, and is merely attempting to draw the United States
> into a holy war with the entire Islamic world. It is merely an
> attempt to rally all Muslims for his cause. Middle Eastern
> scholars accept this and acknowledge it, and you should as well.

> It seems you have been easily duped by Bin Laden propaganda.
> Trying to show a gesture of good will towards Palestinians is
> not an attempt to satiate the grievances of Bin Laden, but a
> wise and logical attempt to calm any anger that might be
> conveniently employed to lash out against America for its
> military campaign in Afghanistan.

> It is not a gesture towards Bin Laden, but a gesture towards
> those who might be teetering on the edge, and waiting to exhibit
> the anger that they have for the Israeli/U.S. alliance. Bin
> Laden has nothing to do with it. It is also another wise attempt
> to strengthen the building of coalitions in the area in general.

> Honestly Suzanne, you have just displayed the breadth of your
> ignorance on this matter. The Taliban has nothing to do with the
> Palestinian/Israeli conflict. They are simply religious zealots
> who intend on enacting their own form of extreme Islam. They
> were not formed out of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and have
> not acted as a group on avenging any of the proposed Palestinian
> grievances. They are merely harboring Bin Laden as a guest.

> Again, the fact that you have even attempted to justify Bin
> Laden’s proposed grievances, by insinuating that we must react
> in his favor, or suffer this continual fate, renders you
> ignorant in the most pathetic way.

> May I ask that you attempt to read a book before you take the
> time to respond again.

Oh screw that. Like books are the end-all.

I've been in many bookstores, and I noted that there are many new arrivals that have a very obvious slant towards them. You can tell by the cover alone that they are not there for informative matters. They are there basically to scare you into parting with your hard earned money, going home, and taking it in like you were reading a riveting ghost story.

But, yes, please do go on ahead and call me a moron. All I see in you is a person who regards the rest of the world as paper dolls. You don;t have any idea what it's like anywhere except in your own little world. I mean, you of all people, sitting in your livingroom, "hey, go get 'em! I'll tell you how the season premiere of Friends turns out when you get back!" should be one to explain what it's like to go full force at a cause until someone else kills you. You obviously can't even figure out that you don't need a command center to be able to cook up the idea to walk into a crowded area as a suicide bomber.

They probably already have plans in place. They probably don't even contact the commanders that much at this point. They would procede regardless....

...and the best example I can think of is the IRA.

Look at how tiny Northern Ireland is. Yet, for decades, the England failed miserably in crushing the organization. They tried everything. Watch "in the name of the father" for a good biopic on their methods. This is land that England already OWNED. It's not that big of a place. This wasn't some unfamiliar country thousands of miles away. It wasn't a vast land like the United States where you can get lost in the population. it wasn't spread out over dozens of countries. And it certainly didn't have the cash flow that this incredibly wealthy group has at it's disposal.

And why did they fail? Because the IRA are invisible. They don't have camps. They don't wear uniforms. They don't announce themselves until it's too late. Does that sound familiar to you?

 

[jeane]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> It may not have taken lots of money or science, but it did take
> a good deal of planning.

And I suppose that's my point, people who have very little at their disposal can be incredibly resourceful. The other point is, don't stop at the WTC bombings. Anthrax, while from what I understand, is not the easiest substance to obtain, has been used to terriorise a whole nation with minimal effort and very little cost. Bin Laden, if it is Bin Laden who is behind the anthrax contaminations, has managed to find a weak spot in the US (and many other countries, mind you) and exploit that. At a smaller, much less harmful level, isn't that what entrepreneurs and advertising people do?

Another contentious point, getting onto other dictators and fanatical people, in my opinion, Hitler showed great savvy in being able to rally a country of essentially good, honest people in to attempting to kill all those of Jewish faith. Something that they possibly wouldn't have fathomed years before Hitler, nor the years since. This is no easy feat. While it's not a good thing and one that should not be celebrated, his ability to brainwash/convince or move people to such a frenzy surely shows great acumen.

 

[Mr. So & So]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> And yet, it hadn't been done 'til now.

Well, maybe you couldn't find 25 people before who were willing to be coordinated in an effort to kil themselves. I don't know.

All I know is, it could have been done before, but wasn't done until now, and a similiar idea has even been attempted before. In fact, I think it was a failed French hijacking that inspired the idea.

Again, in any effort there is a certain sense of strategy, but how much ingenious creativity it requires is another thing. Anywway, it failed in its intended magnitude as well.

I just don't see it as anything inherently creative. But that might be mattter of personal taste.

> Though I typically stand behind most of the comments you make on
> this board, I have to disagree with you on this one. For such a
> rag-tag and ill-equipped group of terrorists, the attacks of
> September 11 had been planned for quite a long time, (as
> evidence has revealed). It took, in my opinion, quite a large
> degree of "intricate planning" and "insight"
> to simultaneously hijack four US passenger planes and, although
> missing half of their intended targets, reduce BOTH towers of
> the World Trade Center to rubble.

Wel, mercilessly ramming a jumbo jet into it could have that effect.

But as far as we know, they moved here, took flight training lessons, and bought a plane ticket. Yes, it did require communication and stability, but that is all it essenitally took to carry this out. I think they were well equipped as well seeing that all they needed to do this was dedication, religious zealotry and money. They had a lot of money. Again, any group could carry such an attack out if they were willing to die, and were influenced by past attacks.

It doens't pain me to say they were creative, I'm just arguing the fact based on my own casual observation of what occured.

> It may not have taken lots of money or science, but it did take
> a good deal of planning.

Well, yes, it took some planning, maybe even a great deal, but a great deal of planning does not equate to ahigh level of intricay. it could just mean intense intense timing and communication.

I understand what you mean, and I can see your point to a degree, but I still see it as more or less an acknowleddgement of the obvious instead of any real insight into strategic planning.

They didn't infiltrate anyhthing that any other individual couldn't have. They didn't deceive anyone to a sly degree, but were given opportunity by an obvious amount of openess.

 

[Mr. So & So]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> you mean, like america against the Indians?

Well, congratulations on demolishing your own point. Yes, the Indians were unable to defeat the settlers through a military effort and were therefore crushed and virtually eradicated.

I'm sure no amount of diplomatic effort would have mattered. But I'm also quite sure you would have supported any military effort initiated by Natiuve Americans.

I wonder why?

Maybe this was simply meant as an irrelevant, ad hominem attack on your part, but it successfully proved my point.

>Oh screw that. Like books are the end-all.<

Well, it certainly is a beginnng in trying to fully understand the complex issues invovled. Divine insight certainly won't guide you to the proper conclusions.

> I've been in many bookstores, and I noted that there are many
> new arrivals that have a very obvious slant towards them. You
> can tell by the cover alone that they are not there for
> informative matters. They are there basically to scare you into
> parting with your hard earned money, going home, and taking it
> in like you were reading a riveting ghost story.

Well, I think Ahmed Rashid's account of the Taliban that was published two years before the attacks is a perfectly objective starting point for further understanding of the Taliban, and the history of Afghanistan's modern troubles. I could recommend more, but you honestly don't seem that interested.

As well, that's the responsibilty of gaining knowldge. You read reviews, you see what is considered objective and you compare different sources of information. Certainly refusing to read any books won't make you any more knowledgebale about a topic.

> They probably already have plans in place. They probably don't
> even contact the commanders that much at this point. They would
> procede regardless....

And the way in which they are able to proceed is through orgnaization, which entails leadership, funding, and places to train. They don't come up with these ideas in their bedrooms.

> Look at how tiny Northern Ireland is. Yet, for decades, the
> England failed miserably in crushing the organization. They
> tried everything. Watch "in the name of the father"
> for a good biopic on their methods. This is land that England
> already OWNED. It's not that big of a place. This wasn't some
> unfamiliar country thousands of miles away. It wasn't a vast
> land like the United States where you can get lost in the
> population. it wasn't spread out over dozens of countries. And
> it certainly didn't have the cash flow that this incredibly
> wealthy group has at it's disposal.
> And why did they fail? Because the IRA are invisible. They don't
> have camps. They don't wear uniforms. They don't announce
> themselves until it's too late. Does that sound familiar to you?

Um, the Taliban is a unacknowledged government who has training camps, artillery sites, travel routes, and military storage houses in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda has the very same things. Bin Laden should not be the ultimate and main target. He is not a strategist, he is merely a religious leader. I'm not obesessed with getting Bin Laden, I'm for the destruction of military and traing sites that make it harder for regimes to remian in place, thus allowing unrefuted refuge to those who hide and train within the region.

Destroying these installations is a good idea. They are not the IRA Suzanne and the logistics are not paralell.

 

[jeane]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> WHAT WHAT WHAT???
> "great lateral thinker" are you nuts?
> It does not take a "great lateral thinker" to come up
> with the INSANE idea of using commercial airplanes as bombs. It
> scares me that there are so very many uneducated people out
> there. I mean @#!!! that's what spawns all this crap in the
> first place ignorance!!!
> Please tell me that you're 10 yrs. old. That is the only excuse
> I can stomach for this nonsensical drivel!
> Listen to what you're saying, you think this psycopath "bin
> @#!!! head" has admirable intelligence ARGH!!!
> Please I beg you, turn off the TV and go read a F**KING book!!!

> K.

All I can say in my defence, is that in my non-emotional point of view, Bin Laden has captured the world's attention. Say you were a part of the Animal Liberation Front or any other organisation, how would you make your case strong enough for the world to stop? I couldn't do it, I know that much. Possibly because it would mean that you would be forced to terrorise people. But then again is that the only way to grab someone's attention? I would hope not. Look at Mother Theresa, a woman who dedicated a major part of her life helping others; she couldn't change things so dramatically in such a short time. Lady Diana? Ghandi? Eleanor Roosevelt is the closest person that I can think of, possibly her already public persona as well as the end of WWII helped her case, still, she managed to change the world slightly and the things she implemented are still having an affect today nearly 60 years on.

Which brings me to the last point. Will Bin Laden's actions have a lasting effect? I wouldn't like to hazard a guess.

 

[Fabricio]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> and do you think there should have been a war declared by
> England when germany was interfering with their economical
> interests sometime around 1913, creating a devestated Germany,
> whose, because of their defeat and the subsequent consequences,
> inflation was so bad that it was looking like the lira, and
> creating an environment of poverty and dispair so a Hitler could
> walk right in to lead a bunch of desperate people to do what
> they did?

well, i think we talked about the attitude churchill had to have in the begining of the war, don`t we? he had to do that - if he did not do what he did, probably europe would have a nazi government until today. If churchill were a pacifist the IIIrd reich would be still alive.

and you probably compare the attitude england and france took against german in the end of the first world war with the attitudes usa takes in relation to the arab world. You just have to remember in algeria and filipines the fundamentalists kill innocent people and these crimes have nothing to do with usa politics. They want that the whole world become islamic fundamentalist... and this is the one the only truth.

 

[suzanne]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> And I suppose that's my point, people who have very little at
> their disposal can be incredibly resourceful. The other point
> is, don't stop at the WTC bombings. Anthrax, while from what I
> understand, is not the easiest substance to obtain, has been
> used to terriorise a whole nation with minimal effort and very
> little cost. Bin Laden, if it is Bin Laden who is behind the
> anthrax contaminations, has managed to find a weak spot in the
> US (and many other countries, mind you) and exploit that. At a
> smaller, much less harmful level, isn't that what entrepreneurs
> and advertising people do?

the thing is, when after the plane crashes, i was wondering a bit about the postal system.

I don't know why I was, but I was thinking of the Unabomber. He went for years and nobody caught him, and if it wasn't for his manifesto and one of his own family members reading it and figuring out who it was, he may still be out in the woods doing what he did until this day. The postal service is an inherent weakness because it's not designed to screen for deadly packages as there are so many of them and they, of course, are more concentrated on making sure the packages arrive as quickly as possible.

> Another contentious point, getting onto other dictators and
> fanatical people, in my opinion, Hitler showed great savvy in
> being able to rally a country of essentially good, honest people
> in to attempting to kill all those of Jewish faith. Something
> that they possibly wouldn't have fathomed years before Hitler,
> nor the years since. This is no easy feat. While it's not a good
> thing and one that should not be celebrated, his ability to
> brainwash/convince or move people to such a frenzy surely shows
> great acumen.

I don't know about that, necessarily. There was already discrimination against jews for many years in europe. They made sure they couldn't do things like own land. Matter of fact, some of their own last names are a result of strong arm tactics.

A couple of centuries ago, they were forced to take last names. if they paid off the official, they could change a good, jewish name. If they didn't, they were given silly last names that would translate into "brick branch" or "ass' head".

it was already there, but just like after this attack on September 11th, it took a bad situation to bring out the absolute worst in many people to behave towards these people like many people started treating anyone who looked Middle Eastern, regardless if they were or not.

 

[K]

Finally a voice of reason!!!

> I don't feel that this particular suicide mission wass
> necessarily that clever. We must remember that there were other
> past terrorist attacks on the U.S. For example the U.S.S. Cole
> and the prior WTC attack. As well as many botched and
> intercepted attacks that were planned. The prior two succeeded
> in creating havoc and a few casualties, but it took these failed
> attempts to motivate the particular planners invovled to simply
> go all out and abandon any sense of intricate strategy.

> It is a rather obvious choice to ram a plane into any structure
> you desire when someone is willing to die to do so. It doesn't
> really require a complex sense of strategy.

> Massive attacks are rather easy to carry out when many people
> are willing to die to get close to their target.

> We all could do the same thing, but we have a general sense of
> sanity when it comes to protecting our own existence.

> So, yes, they were clever enough to realize that we would never
> suspect it, and were obviously, intensely dedicated, but again,
> it takes little intricate planning and insight to actually ram
> an object into another object when someone is willing to die in
> the process. Especially when you are allowed to gain training
> and free access to the very tools you will need in the country
> you plan on attacking.

> I'll give them credit for dedication, but -50 for past failed
> attempts at mass destruction, and taking the strategic easy
> route by way of sucide mission.

Listen Up, Lifeguard et al!
For the last time tenacity and persistence do not equal intellect!
The first attempt in '93 on the Twin Towers failed, so "they" had to try, try again. Knowing they could never fly their aircraft into our airspace they did that horrific, cowardly act on the 11th. Like some older and wiser person once said "necessity is the mother of invention"
I wouldn't label Hitler a man of great intellect for discovering how more cost efficient ways or faster ways he could kill Jews with gasses and ovens etc. would you? I do not differentiate between Hitler and bin Laden with their shared edict to wipe out those that do not fit their mold.

As a resident of lower Manhattan, Sept.11th is a day that is tattoed on my mind. A horror I live with every day when I smell the fires and the underlying odor of what can only be the dead bodies of the thousands of innocent people that were murdered. I am heartbroken when I think of the unimaginable pain the families of the victims must be suffering. The pictures of the missing are still posted in my laundromat. No, the people who did this and the people responsible for these acts are not people of great intellect, They are cowardly and evil in their singlemindedness to annihilate all those different from them. Hatred, necessity and money dictated their attack lack of preparedness on our part made it sucessfull I do not equate this with "great intellect" labeling this attrocity as such is offensive and disgusting to me especially after seeing such destruction firsthand.

 

[Kathleen]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> Oh, come on - an insane individual would not have the mental
> capacity to pull off such a well-planned attack!

Really? would you consider someone willing to commit suicide and take innocent people along with them of sound mind?

> We get it: you don't agree with bin Laden OR his horrible acts
> (most of us don't). But to jump down this poster's throat for
> suggesting that bin Laden just *might* have enough intelligence
> to rally (or fool) an entire group of people to die for his
> beliefs is silly.

Ooh you are a genius, I hope you didn't hurt yourself coming up with that one
But I digress...No, you're right rallying a bunch of starving, poor and uneducated people around your cause when you are one of the wealthiest people in their homeland takes an incredible amount of intellect!

> Why not take your own advice and read a " @#!!! ing
> book," preferably a biography or two about some of the
> world's cruelest dictators. You'll find that most of them
> possessed a good amount of intellect.

Did they really "posses a good amount of intellect"
you sound like a moron and the books I've read
(to be read slowly...as to a child)
B i o g r a p h i e s, F i c t i o n and more! would fill your
F**king house.

 

[Lifeguard Sleeping]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> Really? would you consider someone willing to commit suicide and
> take innocent people along with them of sound mind?

Absolutely. They didn't crash planes into those buildings because they were mentally disturbed; they did it because of their religious fanaticism, believing that their actions were just and that they would be rewarded in the afterlife.

If you consider THAT insane, then you may as well denounce EVERYONE with strong (and questionable) religious views as insane.

> Ooh you are a genius, I hope you didn't hurt yourself coming up
> with that one

No need for that.

> But I digress...No, you're right rallying a bunch of starving,
> poor and uneducated people around your cause when you are one of
> the wealthiest people in their homeland takes an incredible
> amount of intellect!

Nice stereotype. Not ALL of his followers are "starving, poor and uneducated," you know. Insane people can barely practice personal hygiene, much less rally a group of people into killing and dying for their cause. Yeah, that DOES take some intellect.

> Did they really "posses a good amount of intellect"
> you sound like a moron and the books I've read
> (to be read slowly...as to a child)
> B i o g r a p h i e s, F i c t i o n and more! would fill your
> F**king house.

If you actually READ any of those books, I wouldn't be having this inane argument with you.

 

[Lifeguard Sleeping]

Re: Finally a voice of reason!!!

> Listen Up, Lifeguard et al!
> For the last time tenacity and persistence do not equal
> intellect!
> The first attempt in '93 on the Twin Towers failed, so
> "they" had to try, try again. Knowing they could never
> fly their aircraft into our airspace they did that horrific,
> cowardly act on the 11th. Like some older and wiser person once
> said "necessity is the mother of invention"

You seem to have lumped my views on bin Laden in with my opinion of the level of planning involved in carrying out the attacks.

Yes, I DO happen to think that bin Laden is an intelligent individual (newsflash: that DOES NOT mean I agree with or condone his actions). However, all I said about the attacks, themselves, were that it took "insight" (Mr So & So's word) and a certain amount of planning.

> I wouldn't label Hitler a man of great intellect for discovering
> how more cost efficient ways or faster ways he could kill Jews
> with gasses and ovens etc. would you?

Look, people do not just stumble into leadership - they work towards it. In order to reach the level of power that a Hitler or a bin Laden had reached, you're going to need to possess a good amount of intelligence

> As a resident of lower Manhattan, Sept.11th is a day that is
> tattoed on my mind. A horror I live with every day when I smell
> the fires and the underlying odor of what can only be the dead
> bodies of the thousands of innocent people that were murdered. I
> am heartbroken when I think of the unimaginable pain the
> families of the victims must be suffering. The pictures of the
> missing are still posted in my laundromat. No, the people who
> did this and the people responsible for these acts are not
> people of great intellect, They are cowardly and evil in their
> singlemindedness to annihilate all those different from them.
> Hatred, necessity and money dictated their attack lack of
> preparedness on our part made it sucessfull I do not equate this
> with "great intellect" labeling this attrocity as such
> is offensive and disgusting to me especially after seeing such
> destruction firsthand.

Having lived less than an hour away from New York my entire life, I, too, have been personally affected by what has happened (just as many, many other people have been), but I'm not going to let my emotions blind me. These people were not cowardly and evil; in their minds, what they were doing was right and just. They see us as the enemy and a threat to their way of life and the future of their religion. I may not agree with it, but I can at least step outside of my feelings long enough to appreciate that there IS a "method to their madness."

"I have striven not to laugh at human actions, not to weep at them, nor to hate them, but to understand them."

- Benedict Spinoza

 

[Kathleen]

Re: oh, boo hoo

> Absolutely. They didn't crash planes into those buildings
> because they were mentally disturbed; they did it because of
> their religious fanaticism, believing that their actions were
> just and that they would be rewarded in the afterlife.

> If you consider THAT insane, then you may as well denounce
> EVERYONE with strong (and questionable) religious views as
> insane.

> No need for that.

> Nice stereotype. Not ALL of his followers are "starving,
> poor and uneducated," you know. Insane people can barely
> practice personal hygiene, much less rally a group of people
> into killing and dying for their cause. Yeah, that DOES take
> some intellect.

> If you actually READ any of those books, I wouldn't be having
> this inane argument with you.

Hmmm...let's see to reply or not to reply?
No, I don't think I'll waste anymore time on someone who defends or empathises with the actions of monsters, though I do wonder would your opinions be the same if it was say, one of your loved ones burned, crushed and dead under the ruble? (I don't think so) people can speculate and hypothesize all they want, the ugly truth is no one not even myself (till this happened) knows how they'll react when something like this directly affects thier life and friends. I mean my God I saw people jumping from 80 stories!
Oh I don't know, maybe it's just from living in Manhattan my whole life and having lost a friend, a fireman who had more intelligence and guts in his little pinky than those terrorists had in thier whole friggin bodies! that has made me so very f**king angry about this incident
So "forgive" me if I cannot and will not say that the actions of these terrorists were "intelligent" or noteworth in any way for by doing so would be to thier credit of which they deserve none!

I mean really, go plead thier cause to someone else cause what you're saying is falling on my deaf ears don't tell me to acknowledge the intelligence of people who murdered a good friend and hero, quite frankly it's nauseating.

K