is everyone in nyc ok? i'm on long island and this is a total fuckin nightmare
Sweepings Fist : It's not just a noun, it's a verb.
*Please note* -- I have a tendency to post while stoned. Apologies in advance.
absolute tragedy
Sep 11, 2001, 12:13 PM ET98 posts by 22 postersalt.tv.futurama
98 posts
nightmare
I live in France and all the Channels are broadcasting the terrible news, it's terrifying !
"*****Greg Unit 21*****" wrote in message news:_Pqn7.633$[email]...
I'm in Dubai, and am hoping the T.V. stations don't get out of hand with this news... During the Gulf War we had 24/7 CNN on all channels for at least 4 months... It's all terrifying and all but after a fews hours of it we had to get a video into the VCR... Too much...
And I feel so lucky that my girlfriend left Boston 4 days ago... I dread to think...
Nyth
"Nadimo Nyth" wrote in message news:9nlrve$[email]...
news,
Your right about that, In the past 10 Hours there has been maybe 3 hours of news and a lot of repetition. Right now I'm sick and tired of seeing the same images over and over again. Right now I really would like some mindless distraction. Or else I'm seriously going to flip out.
And I know that some people may not have seen it yet being at work and such but it's just too much.
Luckily, the local Fox affiliate that I mentioned a coupe of weeks ago was showing "The Simpsons" when I got home, it was actually nice to watch something mindless for a change today.
It is, and the networks do it no matter what happened, snow, earthquake, heat wave, etc. It's just way too much.
In article , [email] says...
I feel sorry for you guys!
Moon skrev i meldingsnyheter:[email]...
nightmare
Who doesn't? I mean, this is sickening! Whoever did this has absolutely no respect for human life!
"Hung like a tuna can" wrote in message news:[email]...
nightmare
I'm both Sickened and Infuriated at today's events. The News talking heads keep referring to this this as the new Pearl Harbor. But with pearl Harbor we knew who to retaliate to. This is just absurd and outrageous.
<< I'm both Sickened and Infuriated at today's events. The News talking heads keep referring to this this as the new Pearl Harbor. But with pearl Harbor we knew who to retaliate to. This is just absurd and outrageous. >>
This is cowardice. I say it reeks of something Bin Laden would do. Regardless of who did this, I hope they are found and punished. You'll note that all the planes were East to West Coast flights for maximum fuel.... I think the fourth was bound for somewhere else, but the pilots fought back and it crashed in a rural area. In Iraq and Iran, civilians were parading in the streets.... They did not fail their mission this time.
"Robert J. Muldoon" wrote in message news:ajtn7.1449$[email]...
note
I
Am I the only person who wishes they could afford a Hydrogen fuelled Car so that I never would have to spend another cent on Mid-Eastern Oil?
<< Am I the only person who wishes they could afford a Hydrogen fuelled Car so that I never would have to spend another cent on Mid-Eastern Oil? >>
I 'll be laughing if the rumors about their oil running dry in about 30 years are true. They'll be down the tubes. We need synthetic or, yes other fuel sources.
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 19:08:54 GMT, "Robert J. Muldoon" wrote:
A couple of weeks ago, one of his followers told a journalist in England that they were planning a multi-hijacking terrorist attack in the US. He's well funded, well organized, and has made it clear that he wants to hurt America.
We should make certain before we strike back. Then we should wipe out the organization behind it, totally. Then we should being down any government that sponsored, supported or protected them.
They will be!
I would call that being accessories after the fact, at the very least. Right now I am watching Palestinians dancing in the streets. Sickening!
--Larry
Yes, that made me almost angrier than anything, watching people actually celebrating massive carnage like this. How can people teach their children that this kind of disaster is something to cheer for? Old ladies smiling and little kids shouting and jumping up and down, waving Palenstinian flags. I wanted to scream at the screen.
Notice how they only show the same footage of this -celebrating-? its because it was an isolated case, led by 6 or so adults and about 10 kids who were just happy to be on TV. Thats not the same in Iraq though... but remember the US has been bombing Iraq for years...
Im sure these -celebrations- are far from a large scale and are just a couple of insensitive morons after their 15mins of fame.
Mike
In article ,
Well, handing out candy is a good way to get kids smiling, but their were also old ladies, and middle aged men and women. Their own press reported about 4,000 people were in the group of celebrants. That is still a small number in comparison to the population of the country though. I woul hope that other's were more compassionate.
Paul
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 23:26:47 +1000, "Michael Pretlove" wrote:
I have seen footage of several celebrations. The Palestinian Authority has been attacking journalist who are recording events that they know makes them look bad.
It is not a universal response, nor is it isolated.
--Larry
<< I have seen footage of several celebrations. The Palestinian Authority has been attacking journalist who are recording events that they know makes them look bad.
It is not a universal response, nor is it isolated. >>
Certainly not. One of the students in my Television Production class was working at Popeye's (here in New Orleans, LA) and an Arab walked in (raghead, no less) and ordered fifty pieces of chicken. As an afterthought, he asked the man why and the response was, "We're celebrating the events in New York!"
I heard on one of the news reports that the AP has much more extensive footage of Palestinians celebrating, but that the PLO threatened the AP, and so the AP is withholding this footage.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
And how did this make it any better?
Outrageous? Yes. Absurd? No. It's disturbingly logical. Something like this was brewing for a long time. And I'm afraid it's not the end of it, either. I just hope it isn't the beginning.
Ostap Bender wrote:
100% ACK
Over a year ago I read the book "Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire" by 70-year-old Berkeley professor Chalmers Johnson. What happened today is *exactly* what he predicted. The behaviour of the US military in other countries will cause terrorist attacks in the US. But that it happened so relatively soon after the publication of the book (February 2000 here in Germany) surprised me. Unfortunately the responsible persons always get away - the high-ranked US militaries and the men behind today's attack. It's always the innocent who have to die. :-(
"Martin Schmidt" wrote in message news:9nm3om$8ei6k$[email]...
that
Why? Tom Clancy has been writing about this shit for years now. None of what happened today was really Original Ideas.
Michael Zaite wrote:
I didn't say it was original. I just said it has been predicted, so it was no surprise.
"Martin Schmidt" wrote in message news:9nm7sa$8mgbj$[email]...
Yea?
Tell that to the people on the 80th floor of the north building.
Michael Zaite wrote:
Gee... read again what I wrote in my first post.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
heads
Harbor
The attack of Pearl Harbor was made by the Japanese as a military movie. They needed to keep the US out of the pacific for a year. Luckily we didn't have our carriers in harbor as Japan had hoped. Also more then 75% of the people killed in Pearl were military personnel and they at least had some fighting chance during the attack. Where as here we have some random terrorist group killing thousands of innocent people simply to make some mindless statement.
Politics is an extreme case of Absurdity.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
movie.
some
Now the above is not exactly the same as your original "But with Pearl Harbor we knew who to retaliate to", now, is it? What I am driving at is that if that's retaliation you're concerned about, you're only doing your part in perpetuating this violence instead of preventing it.
it's
Sure, you can brush it off with a thoughtless remark, but that won't make the problem go away. And the problem is not as simple as those people just being crazy fanatics. I.e. - even if you hunt down and severely punish everyone responsible for this massacre (which isn't likely to happen) it won't guarantee it never happening again. New terrorists will come. And you can't scare these people by the severity of the punishment, now, can you?
That's what should be the main concern. And I don't see it being exactly that.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
movie? I hate spell check.
I had time to think over and refine my opinion.
Yes I am. I'm a violent person. I'm not going to deny it. These terrorists deserve nothing but cold empty deaths and I personally would be happy to bring it upon all of them my self with my bare hands. I'm that kinda guy. Peace is what the winner gets not something you can create without conflict.
First, it wasn't a thoughtless remark, and second nobody said it would. It doesn't change what it is though. An Absurd act against humanity.
When you get bullied you either have to kick ass or get bullied more. So far getting bullied by terrorists hasn't been working the past 30 years or so. Time to try something different.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:jqzn7.1612$[email]...
Does it mean nothing to you that Bin Laden shares this exact same sentiment about the U.S.?
"Mozeman" wrote in message news:yWAn7.148087$[email]...
terrorists
guy.
sentiment
No it doesn't. The US is a country. It's not like he was simply attacking a person he didn't like in the manner of a typical antisocial headcase. He completely erradicated Thousands of people who never directly affected or insulted him simply to make a political statement. This total lack of basic humanity should not go unpunished. In my opinion he has surrendered any rights he has to life or happiness. He deserves only to know a cold, slow, and very painful death to make it quite clear to him that his actions are not, in any way no matter how twisted your world view, at all acceptable in the 21st century by any human being anywhere in any walk of life. I'm just sorry that we'll only be able to kill him once.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 04:08:34 GMT, "Michael Zaite" wrote:
I have many relatives living and working in New York, some just miles from the World Trade Center. Bin Laden, or anyone who was in anyway associated with the attacks, have caused a direct threat to me, my country, my family and my friends. It is very likely that a I have lost at least one friend, but I may not know for days. I have done nothing to them.
I do not think they should be killed in retaliation for these attacks. They should be killed because they will attack us again if they are not stopped. Nothing short of a declaration of total war against the terrorists and the nations that harbor them will have a lasting effect.
Perhaps we will never stop all terrorism, but we have the capability to dramatically reduce it, if only temporarily.
As Shakespeare said "A coward dies many times". He has already died many times, hopefully the next one will be the last.
--Larry
Here's what "Michael Zaite" told "alt.tv.futurama" on Wed, 12 Sep 2001 04:08:34 GMT on the subject of "Re: absolute tragedy":
http://www.unverse.com/WW2.html
-------------------------------------------------------
1945
British fire bomb Dresden , killing 135,000 civilians.
[...]
US bombs Tokyo, killing 124,000 civilians.
[...]
Germany surrenders. Churchill: "We may allow ourselves a brief period of rejoicing." 100,000 rapes reported in Berlin.
[...]
On 6 August, 100,000 Japanese killed by atom bomb at Hiroshima. As many die later from radiation. Three days later, another 75,000 killed by second bomb on Nagasaki.
-------------------------------------------------------
"Bart Van Hemelen" wrote in message news:[email]...
to
a
Yea you see those were acts of a declared war and many were pre-warned attacks aswell. my young and overly pacifistic "friend" And also retaliatory such as the case of Dresdin and Tokyo. And the rape one is bure BS for any argument you were trying to make.
On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:20:47 GMT, "Michael Zaite" wrote:
Dresden was told that if they shut down the rail yard that was supplying German troops, the allies would leave them alone. They continued to use the yard and then they were attacked.
Also, Germany started that war.
Japan started that war and were committing unspeakable atrocities against Chinese civilians, American military prisoners, Philippine civilians etc.
Why quote Churchill in connection with the alleged actions of the Red Army?
While there were rapes and looting etc in the capture of Berlin, the numbers are not certain. If you consider what the Germans did to the Russians in the years leading up to that time, you have a chance to understand. Nothing experienced by anyone can compare to the siege of Stalingrad. The soldiers of the Red Army were deprived of much of their humanity by the atrocities inflicted on them. They were all in a state of extreme starvation, after the retreating Germans burned all the food and crops they could not carry with them. I don't think that is an excuse, but it is essential to understanding what happened.
People love to point out that Japan was trying surrender and we bombed them anyway. Let's also remember that they were training children how to kill American soldiers with sharpened bamboo. Some of this information was not de-classified until recently to protect our code breaking secrets.
In general I am a very peaceable individual. I will tolerate almost any cultural differences with my neighbors. I will do my best to get along with anyone. But if I am attacked or threatened I will defend myself with any amount of force that I feel is necessary. When I am done I will mourn necessity of my enemies destruction or harm, but I will feel very little remorse.
The willingness to defend yourself is not being violent. It is being a
human.
--Larry
"Larry" wrote in message news:[email]...
Not to mention the London bombings in the summer of '40.
<...>
retaliatory
any
At least there's sombody here who get's it.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
Oh, don't worry. The polls show that 95% of people, as you eloquently put it, "get it". That's why we are not looking at peaceful co-existence any time soon. 3000 years of fucking ourselves up and we still have learned nothing.
Frankly, I wouldn't be too disappointed if one of these days aliens arrived and wiped out the human race. Wouldn't be too much of a loss. Besides, there's a good chance that if they don't, we'll manage without their help.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
And we never will. Humans are terminally flawed. Just like the jawless Fish It's simply a matter of time before something bigger and better evolves to take our place.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
I'm sure you'll be deliriously happy when it does.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
Fish
to
No I'll be dead.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
That's what I'm saying. You can't be happy while you are alive.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
A wise man once said "Happiness only comes in small doses" The rest of the time people generally are not happy.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
A wiser man said "If you want to be happy, be happy". The problem is, people don't want to be happy.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
the
A wiser man? That's not the stupidest thing I heard all day. Not wanting to be happy is a byproduct of life in the real world.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
It was actually an alias for a team of wise men.
More like the main product.
Anyhow, if you are at all interested, here's an elaborate opinion of another wise man on this topic:
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1573221112/ref=bxgy_sr_text_a/002-084 7769-3354458
For $16.50 I'm not that interested.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
Ah, so that's the price of your desire for happiness :-).
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1573221112/ref=bxgy_sr_text_a/002-084
Like I said Happiness comes in small doses. And I'm content with that.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
Well, it's your life. I'd rather have misery is small doses.
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
Then the misery is harsher and the Happiness is desensitized.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
Sorry to repeat the ancient wisdom, which by now has been misinterpreted so much its meaning has almost been lost, but... this is the case of "It's true if you believe it to be true".
"Ostap Bender" wrote in message news:[email]...
news:...
True enough, as long as you belleve so;)
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
I wonder just how much longer you'll go on to get the last word :-).
Be a big loss to me.
Nothing last forever. Dinosaurs were on Earth for 120 million years, and then vanished in the blink of an eye.
I noticed you left out the millions killed in Poland, Russia, France, Spain, England, and so on by the Germans, and the equal rape and brutality of the Japanese against China, Korea, the Philippines, and so on. Go read about the Rape of Nanking for starters.
In light of the vast evil these two countries were responsible for, your list pales in comparison.
And Japan and Germany have never rose up again to declare war on innocent people. I would say those retaliatory acts served their purpose.
Unfortunately, for your reasoning, this isn't the case of declaring war against definible countries, such as Japan and Germany are, with territories to lose, and social infrastructures, this is a totally different thing: fanatical ideas and strong beliefs held by individuals in a loose organisation. We aren't talking organised armies, governments or whatever, we are talking about something looser, something that's spread around the world. So, even if retaliatory acts may well have been effective against Japan and German atrocities, in this case I believe they'd have little effect in defeating this kind of enemy, and more likely to strengthen it... especially in the long run.
One thing for you to consider: how many of those from the Islamic faith populate the US? How many new recruits to religious fanaticism will the US be making in its own land, if they start going ape-shit about this? Sure, I'm not saying that there are any US Muslims who would currently do this, for they are as decent as any of the US citizens are, but if the US starts going Rambo, with the jingoism added, then what will happen in the future with the next generation, or even the current?
Oh, and I've heard that some Muslims are now getting targeted in the US by local mobs. That's bound to endear them to the democratic institutions and the American way of life! I know that the vast majority of US citizens won't be doint this sort of crap, most are decent, unlike what Bin Laden and his fanatics believe of them, but such retaliatory talk isn't helping this situation, and is further fueling *unjust* hatred.
Graham
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:21:11 +0100, Graham wrote:
The kind of coordinated strike we saw yesterday requires the involvement, protection or at least complacency of a government. If those governments are held accountable, they will stop. They do have territory to lose, and so on.
We can't totally stop them, but we could slow it way down. If no government gave them quarter, they'd be very limited to what they could do.
And if we do nothing ? ? ? If we take out a few (or perhaps several) hundred known members of major terrorist organizations we could make a dent for a long time.
--Larry
I don't personally believe that it's *necessarily* true that a government helped these terrorist forces. The claims could well be a convenient way for government intelligence to shift away from admitting that they were caught out by a simple, even if a well planned, attack, originating from a loose group of terrorists.
Some experts have claimed that all that would have been needed was a copy of the flight schedules, some basic to moderate flying lessons, a flight simulator, a road map, and the will to carry out such a brutal act without remorse. Sure, there would need to be some intelligence work to figure out some stuff, but these are terrorists who've been used to covert operations, not a bunch of students who decided on that day to commit this act.
I'm not saying that in no way a government wasn't involved, it may well be the case that a certain government was, but I'm saying that it may not necessarily be so. It could well be the words and wishes of some embarrassed officials who are meant to be accountable to the US public.
Graham
<< I don't personally believe that it's *necessarily* true that a government helped these terrorist forces. The claims could well be a convenient way for government intelligence to shift away from admitting that they were caught out by a simple, even if a well planned, attack, originating from a loose group of terrorists.
I'm not saying that in no way a government wasn't involved, it may well be the case that a certain government was, but I'm saying that it may not necessarily be so. It could well be the words and wishes of some embarrassed officials who are meant to be accountable to the US public. >>
Afghanistan (the ruling Taliban) pretty much welcomed bin Laden to live in their country, and if they had any sense, they would place him under arrest and turn him over to the United States and take the $5,000,000 reward. If they get attacked, it's their own fault. Under NATO regulations a country that knowingly harbors such a criminal is held accountable for his actions.
In article ,
By the way, different corporations and organizations are offering rewards. Yesterday, the total was about $105 million.
Unfortunately, I don't think Afghanistan will turn him over. For one thing, Bin Ladin will not hesitate the have the leader of Afghanistan assassinated. The U.S. may bomb Afghanistan, but they will not purposely try to kill a national leader. Bin ladin has no such moral. Also, there is apparently some tradition where if a man is a guest in your house, even if he killed your family, you never turn him out. I think I would certainly make an exception.
Paul
"Paul Tomko" schrieb
Even if the police is about to flatten your house with the man in it?
In article ,
Apparently, they have asked bin Ladin to leave. They haven't actually gone and booted him out, but at least they are asking him to leave. I don't know if he will or not.
Paul
On 20 Sep 2001 08:42:49 -0500, [email] (Paul Tomko) wrote:
The clerics have recommended that the Taliban ask him to leave in his own time. It is not legally binding and so far they haven't asked him.
I think it's just an attempt to look like they are co-operating while letting him stay an plan the next attack.
--Larry
On Sat, 15 Sep 2001 16:26:57 +0100, Graham wrote:
The hijackers were financed for at least several months while they took flight lessons etc. There were at the very least 18 involved, most likely more who will be caught. The cost of the operation was in the $100,000s range and involved a long term stationary training base. You can't get that kind of thing without the government knowing.
At the very least, one government allowed the terrorists to function. It is far more likely that they were directly involved.
--Larry
Except, if it is him, Bin Laden is a multi-millionaire... so I doubt that the costs, over time, would have mattered. Plus, you haven't taken into account that these individuals could well have had some form of paid employment. As I said, this operation could well have been simple, even if well planned; simple and cost effective enough not to involve any governments. However, all I'm arguing is that it isn't necessarily so that a government helped or sponsored this.
As for the base... that's just supposition, and doesn't tell us much about what exactly what the base entailed, how much it cost to set up, or whatever - that's if it exists, in the first place.
I see a lot of talk about stuff that doesn't involve any concrete evidence. It's about time people looked at *all* possibilities, without making firm statements about government involvement, etc. Otherwise, what are you basing it on... purely prejudicial thought; not something that will solve anything.
Graham
On Sun, 16 Sep 2001 16:31:44 +0100, Graham wrote:
Bin Laden is being protected by the Taliban government. He was involved in the 1993 WTC attack. That is enough to go after him. He was also involved in the 1998 embassy bombings. and still they are harboring him. Add the attack on American military barracks in Saudi Arabia, and the USS Cole.
He has been tried and convicted, the Taliban still protects him. We have plenty of reason to react and that doesn't even include the new attack on the WTC.
The conspiracy involved at least the 18 hijackers, plus support personnel. It has been estimated that at least 50 people were directly involved. To get a group of that many people to go on a suicide attack required deep indoctrination. That was not accomplished sitting in an apartment chatting with some friends. It was done by a well organized group who have the following:
- Camps and / or safe havens
- A knowledge of airport security
- The ability to forge documents
- A knowledge of building construction.
- A knowledge of aircraft design
- Major financial resources.
This was not done without some knowledge on the part of one or ore governments.
If, as the evidence implies, Bin Laden's group was involved, then the Taliban Government in Afghanistan knows they are terrorists and they about the training camps. If they did know this specific operation, it doesn't matter. They are as guilty as they come.
--Larry
Um, im sure that they could have checked that out when they flew into the USA... everyone knows they have metal detectors in airports. I think the reason why people are saying this is because they are in denial that something so bad could have been done so easily. Im sure that the groundstaff would have thought little about a person taking a 3inch knife on board a plane. I know for a fact that apart from a few select airports (Heathrow and Narita which do check exceedingly well), the person looking at the xrays of hand luggage barely even checks the contents of each bag, and is much more happy to socialise with some other security personnel.
Mike
Here's what OmegaMan told "alt.tv.futurama" on Wed, 12 Sep 2001 21:37:34 -0700 on the subject of "Re: absolute tragedy":
Two wrongs don't make a right.
<< Two wrongs don't make a right. >>
Sure, if we had leaders like Ghandi, we would probably be better off. As he once said, 'An eye for and eye leaves the world blind.' However, is it better to be blind or dead?
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 23:20:40 GMT, "Robert J. Muldoon" wrote:
Ghandi got shot and left his country in a civil war. That comes up far short of my definition of success. In the years that have followed, India has had to deal with numerous internal uprisings, border wars with China and Pakistan, assassinations etc. Hey proof of the pudding is in the eating.
--Larry There's Color on the street / Red, white and blue / People shuffling their feet People sleepin in' their shoes / There's a warning sign on the road ahead There's a lot of people sayin' / We'd be better off dead I don't feel like satan / But I am to them / So I try to forget it, any way I can Keep on rockin' in free world (Neil Young 1989)
But a vast, horrifying evil makes a harsh repsonse somewhat more understandable. You can't take the killing of a few thousand Japanese with an A-bomb in isolation. You have to consider the millions of innocent Chinese, Fillipinoes, Malaysians, and other Eastern Asians killed by the Japanese into account. Plus the millions of Japanese civilians that would have been killed had the war gone on and the Japanese home islands would have had to have been invaded with conventional troops.
"OmegaMan" wrote:
Ummm, no? Germany (can't really talk for the Japanese, but I'm sure it's likewise) didn't declare war again as our thinking patterns changed. Do you really think Gerhard Schr�der is sitting there and thinking "Damn retaliations, otherwise we could take over France now." ? If so, I feel sorry for you.
Marc W.
And what changed your thinking patterns? Perhaps maybe the horror that was inflicted on the German people in response to the atrocities they and their government committed? Don't feel sorry for me. I not the one who gassed 6 million Jews, Gypsies, and Homosexuals.
"OmegaMan" wrote :
maybe the following?
Me either.
Marc
May I suggest, Mike, that you stick to commenting about Futurama, rather than descend towards the kind of mindset that Bin Laden and his followers have delved into. (Not saying that he's actually done this atrocity, as we're not 100% sure... but we do know his supporters support this action, and it's the mindset I'm talking about, not the actual guilt for this crime.) The more I listen to your talk of vengence, the more I realise that we'll never get out of this stinking hole that the world is in.
Until people actually start taking note about the hellhole that is the Middle East, realising what *really* is going on, not just getting their information on a slanted basis (from either side) or treating it as some "Die Hard" movie, then just maybe things could go in the right direction. But, all this talk of killing Bin Laden, etc, is only serving to show that people's views of this dire situation seems based on some Hollywood blockbuster interpretation. But, this horrible situation deserves more than just that.
Sure, if it's the Muslim fanatics that are responsible, then something has to be done (not just, "let's go out and kick some butt"), but this knee-jerking only serves the side of reaction, not of reason. Isn't that what makes us "civilised", that we live in societies that pride themselves for their use of reason?
So... you go and have your fantasies about killing Bin Laden, I'll try and think of something constructive.
As for constructive: it's about time that the US took the Palestinians' grievances a bit more seriously, than just sticking dogmatically behind Israel's actions. I'm not saying that every action by Israel isn't justified, I'm just saying that quite a few of their acts have certainly been unjust... yet the US turns a blind eye and still supports them, no matter what is done (even if they do criticise, it's a simple slap on the wrist kind of thing). It is this uncritical support for certain actions by Israel that causes such jubilations in the streets of Beirut when this barbaric act happened. Sure, their celebrating was uncivilised... but these are the enemies that the US are creating for itself.
May I also add that on the other side of this equation, that the leaders of the Arab nations, and beyond, must hand over (or be forced by the native populations that live under them) democratic power to their people, granting them full democratic rights... rather than constantly distracting them with the usual anti-Israel and USA rhetoric, that just adds to this situation. Basically, a lot of the anti-Israel stuff coming from the Arab world is by the leaders of certain countries fearful of losing power, and trying to avoid their part of the blame... so they create their own bogey men.
As for calls to bomb and kill the perpetrators (that's if they are these Muslim fanatics): this will just strengthen such resentment, create more foot soldiers for their cause and cause further bombings... not just in the US, it must be said.
So, go ahead and blow them up, kick some butt, do a Rambo... but don't start whining when things get even more out of hand, and it goes belly up in other parts in the world... and don't start whining if other countries start wanting further protection/aid for the mess that will ensue.
Graham
PS - If this seems insensitive... I apologise, this was not the intent. I do feel for those who have suffered during those bombings, and feel anger and revulsion at those who have carried out such a brutal crime... but I just don't see the answer in the terms of simple reprisals, which I feel will only make matters worse than they are.
"Graham" wrote in message news:[email]...
That's Human Nature buddy. Lay off the Star Trek because people are fundamentally simpleminded animals that like their shiny things and hate when other people take their shiny things. Be those Liberty, Security, Life, or well Shiny things.
What then? Should we thank him for teaching us the error of our Infidel ways? The guy needs to be Deleted just like anyone else like him. If he kept his beard out of the US I really wouldn't care. But he got greedy and now he has to learn that he bit off way more then he can chew. Or If it wasn't him whoever did do it deserves the exact same treatment.
What are we going to do throw copy's of "Cliffnotes for the Koran" at them so that they learn a less violent interpretation of the book? Maybe ask them really politely to please stop sowing terror in the U.S.?
And I think nether faction deserves Israel anymore. If it's supposedly so wholly why are they acting so un-wholly about it? But in all real fairness the Palestine's were there first. But nether faction was listening to the U.S. anyways. After 30 years you stop wasting your breath. The only thing the U.S. really does with Israel is sell them stuff. If the Palestine could afford our stuff we would probly sell to them too.
And also If Iraq or Iran or any of our "not nice countries" got similar treatment do you really think Americans wouldn't be dancing and laughing at them? We'd do the same damn thing and you know it.
No kidding. But it won't really change. The people in power usually stay in power since they knew what they were doing to get in power in the first place.
Bah Bombings are so crude. Black Ops are the weapon of choice these days. The trick is to break down their credibility first so when you kill them they don't become martyrs.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. It will never end. anyone who thinks so is seriously kidding themselves. But I'll be damned if someone tries to kill me in the name of some ancient bullshit superstitions.
So I've noticed... and hence why I decided to comment against such simpleminded crap that has gone on for so long (take that as personal or not... it's not meant that way, but a generalisation). Sure, I know it's something that is second nature to many, but Hell I should actually think it's justifiable! I can understand the hatred... but does that make it right, or something that should be acted on? If you, and others, think so... then go and live with Bin Laden, he'll sure know he can discuss with people like yourself with such attitudes. As I said, you're still speaking from the same book as he is.
Yet again a typical Hollywood-styled answer (you can say Star Trek for me... I'll say Rambo for you, right?): focus on the individual bad guys in history, yet not learn the social lessons. Hey, don't ever learn, it only hurts people's heads, just watch a movie and history and political problems will all be solved! Do you know what has gone on in that region of the planet for centuries, have you ever taken time to read about that region, study it, learn the history there? If so... good, but I doubt it from your type of response. Yep, just "delete" the guy, and all will be well... yeah, right! It's such thoughts that are endemic in human thought, and seems to be so here too! So, I suspect that your earlier comment does have more validity then I have admitted.
A reasoned response doesn't just involve kind words and thoughts, but actions resultant from such thoughts. For instance, as well as exacting military revenge, why not also act on the legitimate grievances that many in the Middle East are compaining about, in relation to Israel. What do many there expect: to be treated fairly. It's the feeling that they aren't being treated as such that fuels such hatred, and reading and taking stock of the more violent interpretations of the Koran. That's not the only thing that can be done, and I don't think that the Jewish people in that region shouldn't have their say either, but it's more than just going in with guns blazing. There has to be more than just that kind of response, otherwise we'll be back to square one. And if you say that's life... then why even bother?
I don't really get the "wholly" [sic] point you're making, or more truthfully I think it's a moot point. As for the US selling to the highest bidder, I suppose that's a point, but that's not just it. The US certainly needs a long-term political ally in that region, for strategical political reasonings... hence the preferencial arming of Israel. Sure, there are temporary allies that are created there, but it needs something long-term, so the economic cynicism is diverted for a more political cynicism, which in turn makes for more economic gain.
I doubt there would be such widespread public celebrations about the death of 20,000 Iranian or Iraqis due to a US strike on a building. There might well be quite a bit of perverse approval, but I'd have thought most would be a bit too uneasy about it to openly celebrate. Sure, there would be some open celebration in pockets of the States, but not on the scale that it was in Beriut. For one thing, the feelings of those in Beriut and those in the US are different... historically so, as well as the immediate. Totally different histories, totally different philosophies, reasonings, lessons, personal experiences make up for different responses. Yeah, deep down we are the same, but we carry some different baggage that weighs us down.
Yeah, that's a point, I suppose. But again, I was saying what I felt to be right, not what I expected to happen. I'm a cynical sod, and I don't think much will change there, not in the immediate... but that doesn't mean that I lose my tongue and say nothing. I'll make my point and hope that someone will listen... you never know.
Ah, like the way the US are currently dealing with Saddam, Castro, and others... let's see what the fruits will be with Black Ops. Breaking down credibility is not too difficult in a media friendly world, like the US, Europe and Japan... but when you're talking about the Middle East and other places, the media structure is different, more sluggish for one thing... and long held beliefs tend to be stronger and harder to break down. Plus, how long has the US got to appease those impatient at home?
Absolutely, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. But, it's also reasoned thinking, otherwise how will you know what to be vigilant about? Ignorance doesn't defend liberty, it's the first stage in its destruction. Also, liberty is such a bold word to use... are you sure you have the liberty you think you have, or is this just another example of Black Ops at work? Think about it.
Graham
If 20,000 Iranians or Iraqis were killed by a U.S. Strike on a building today, there might indeed be celebration, although it would mostly be releif at something being done, even though Iraq and Iran probably had very little if anything to do with the strike. If 20,000 were killed in Iran or Iraq last week, I know that there would be no celebration. We would only wonder what the heck the strike was about, and we would probably be afraid because it meant that we would probably be going to war again.
Paul
"Paul Tomko" wrote:
Could be that that was what those in Beirut thought, not that I endorse it at any rate.
Mind you, at least I only saw the same 2 families celebrating over and over again on TV. I think it is a dangerous thing to do to generalize here and extrapolate on a whole nation/religious group. TV tends to pick the rare cases instead of showing the (boring) average for obvious reasons.
Marc W.
"Graham" wrote in message news:[email]...
Life,
No again I have to point out that I'm not. I am 100% not advocating the deaths of thousands of innocent people in the name of a rather childish political statement against capitalism. Especially by somebody with as much money as that spoiled brat has. I simply wish to see him (or whoever did this, all signs continue to point to him) brought to justice and hung by his neck for his crimes against humanity.
kept
he
him
*fake laughter* Ah hahaha.......No.
What lessons would those be huh? What should I learn? That life is nothing but a waste of time? That no matter how hard you work to make your life better it doesn't matter because you will simply be killed by some idiot with an agenda? I know those lessons. That's why Justice must be served.
This is probably the most mindless line you have made yet.
I know the entire thing is one fucked up argument over who's religion is better. The answer, None of them.
So your of the school of thought that what? Criminals should be congratulated?
them
As far as I'm concerned the both of them can bomb themselves to hell over there. The U.S. doesn't meddle in Ireland why are we wasting our time there in another religiously driven or rather money driven but hidden under the guise of religious driven war?
I have been asking that for years. So far the only answer I have is because it's easier to bother then to not bother.
uncivilised...
could
at
I hate my spell check.
If it's so moot then why don't the people simply admit it's about the money they would get from the real-estate they want?
You don't honestly think Israel sees us as an Ally do you? If so you need to seriously re-examine the current state of affairs there.
Bah just set up cameras in a College town full of drunken idiots when it happens and you have your little 30 second shot to keep replaying for days on end. So far I've only seen small groups of Flag burners and Islamic hillbillies firing off AK's. It's easy to pretend that that represents a whole country when it doesn't.
in
No that's true you don't. But it's still only the people with money that really get listened to.
There are laws against assassination of state leaders. Otherwise they would have been dead long ago.
Well remember there is an active anti-taliban group in Afghanistan already. We helped them defeat the Russians I'm sure we could do it again. But will we just end up with another ungrateful zealot? As for time. Well I'd say 2 weeks. After that people will be angry but back to regular life. That's part of the reason we are taking our time.
Reasoned thinking is a part of vigilance not an added price. You should know that.
It was a quote if you wern't aware.
I'm sure I have the liberty I have proof that I have. I can move freely about the country with out any state permission. I'm free to live my life how I choose in any way I wish within the extent of the law. Sure you could argue that laws control too much but really it's all up to the makers of the laws (the citizen) to really define them. And aside from being outlawed from parking my car on my front lawn and other petty city ordanances like this, there aren't really many laws I find terribly constricting to my sense of personal Liberty.
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 05:12:28 +0100, Graham wrote:
I am thinking of something constructive. It involves Bin Laden, two cruise missiles and a toilet plunger.
--Larry
"Larry" wrote in message news:[email]...
Pacifist. I say turn Afghanistan into one big sheet of glass. I definitely feel over-reaction is best in this situation.
In article ,
What for? Do the secretaries and businessmen of Afghanistan deserve death anymore than the ones in the WTC did? There is a group of people responsible and they should suffer. I'm sick of war being all about killing civilians and troops while the officers and leaders who started the whole thing are protected.
Paul
"Paul Tomko" wrote in message news:3ba0c47c$0$12830$[email]...
Uh, because I'm really pissed. (For Merkin values thereof.)
This is all still in the early stages. I do think some sort of over-reaction is called for here. Definitely. Merely "punishing" those responsible for Tuesday won't cut it.
That's pretty much all I'm gonna say, there's minds a lot smarted than mine working on this.
In article ,
I would punish those responsible, and also apprehend and destroy any other current admitted terrorist groups. I would not go so far as to punish a whole nation of people for what a small group of people has done. After all, if we were to punish any nation that has contributed even to just Bin Ladin's group, then the U.S. would be one of the nations we'd have to blow up.
Thank God for that. I don't think killing innocent civilians is called for to avenge our innocent civilians.
Paul
"Paul Tomko" wrote in message news:3ba244fb$0$12828$[email]...
However, these groups do have nations backing them. Taking the view that this is really just a law enforcement matter will do nothing. Then again, holding the attitude that this is purely a military matter won't do much good either.
mine
Aye, what's that supposed to mean! Actually, revenge is the furthest thing from my thoughts. We've got to do something that will make anyone think twice about contemplating this sort of attack in the future, and come up with "umm, let's not go there again". And it's gonna have to be nasty.
See: Henry Rollins; Think Tank, Disc One, Track 4 (titled World Peace)
Mike
In article ,
If we listen to the Palestinian's plight, the Israeli's will hate us. If we listen to Israel, the Palestinian's will hate us. If we ignore them both, they will both hate us, and the world will disdain us because the most powerful country in the world has no compassion. We have several options, and they are all losers.
And if we forgive and forget, it will also cause further bombings because they know they can do it and get away with it.
I am not in favor of bombing anybody. I think that the nations of the world should unite to hunt down and stamp out all terrorists, whether the be Muslim, IRA, PLO, Columbian drug Lords, or even United States Citizens. Terrorism is the wrong way to go about getting attention, and there is not one nation in the world that is not a potential target. We can not fight the war with bombs and airplanes. We need to fight it with intelligence and stealth. We need to infiltrate, gather information and take down the leaders and fanatical followers.
Paul
"Paul Tomko" wrote
and forgot "listen to both".
Marc W.
In article ,
If we listen to both, then they will both hate us for listening to the enemy.
Paul
"Paul Tomko" wrote in message news:3ba0fcfd$0$18893$[email]...
Obviously, the US has to decide for one of the 4 options and the one you left out to me seems like the best way. Besides, I doubt they would hate USA for that. At least the Palestinians repeatedly asked for foreign proxies and Israel can't afford to dismiss fair talks without losing its credibility.
As USA dropped the ball with two sided talks after Bush took office, other countries started sponsoring those and to many there it looks like USA is being controlled by their enemy's lobby in the USA.
Marc W.
<< As for constructive: it's about time that the US took the Palestinians' grievances a bit more seriously, than just sticking dogmatically behind Israel's actions. I'm not saying that every action by Israel isn't justified, I'm just saying that quite a few of their acts have certainly been unjust... yet the US turns a blind eye and still supports them, no matter what is done (even if they do criticise, it's a simple slap on the wrist kind of thing). It is this uncritical support for certain actions by Israel that causes such jubilations in the streets of Beirut when this barbaric act happened. Sure, their celebrating was uncivilised... but these are the enemies that the US are creating for itself. >>
The US stays away- they're all mad at us. The US intervenes- they're all mad at us. It's a paradox.
"Michael Zaite" wrote in message news:...
No prob there, I got it what you wanted to say.
OK, forget I said anything. Obviously what I said wasn't meant for you.
Michael Zaite wrote:
Correct. The problem here: the US have bullied around in the world and now get kicked back.
In article ,
We bully around in the world because the United Nations agrees that something must be done, but nobody else wants to get involved. We get some help from the Brits, and we get told by the French not to use their airspace. The whole civilized world wants something done, and when the U.S. does it, we shoulder the whole blame. I have never liked being the world's police force, and I think it is more than ever a good time to stop. If the price for our policing is our innocent civilians than I say we just sit back and let the ethnic cleansings and genocide in other countries continue. Either that or the other UN nations grow balls and throw in support when they agree on something being done. There's no reason the .us should bear the brunt of hostility when it is the whole civilized world that wants action taken. Paul
Paul Tomko wrote:
The UN have not agreed to the bombardment of Serbia.
The Serbs got bombed because they were raping innocent people. Once they stopped, the bombs stopped. If being a bully is stepping up and protecting innocent women and children from a brutal dictator, then I am the first one out there doing the bullying.
uk.current-events.us-bombing
Dont want to step on toes, but this is a Futurama newsgroup and there are now more related newsgroups to this topic. I am also aware that i posted in this thread, but 50 or so posts off topic is a bit much.
above is a new uk based newsgroup, vent your anger there.
Mike
"Michael Pretlove" wrote in message news:0H2o7.4974$[email]...
And these are people from the Futurama Newsgroup Discussing events in the Futurama Newsgroup. It's not as if this is draining from any conversation that was going on. In fact this is the most activity this group has had in a while.
OmegaMan wrote:
So, when will the bombardment of Turkey start? I mean, they're killing innocent Kurds, including women and children. Oh wait... Turkey is NATO member. Would the bombardment of Serbia have taken place, if the country had become a NATO member before? No.