babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
Search | FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the best of babble   » Retaliate- against whom?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Retaliate- against whom?
Horseshoe Bend
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1345

posted 11 September 2001 02:58 PM      Profile for Horseshoe Bend     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If Bin Laden was in on this he has been underground for days, if not weeks, by now. We could attack the Taliban, I suppose. How smart is that????

Chomsky points out that the US way of control is to project an image that it is crazy and erratic enough to go off at any moment for any reason. That's frightened everyone, until now. Seems we've found someone just as crazy.


From: Cherokee, NC USA | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 11 September 2001 03:04 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think its a matter of attacking the guilty parties. I think the U.S. will start saying that the only way to prevent this from happening again is to start attacking all those who threaten its safety.

Their not going to wait a year to find out the results of an investigation. Americans will demand their gov't act now to prevent this from happening again.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
wagepeace
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 114

posted 11 September 2001 03:05 PM      Profile for wagepeace     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Righteous Might.

Nuff said.


From: In a fog and on anti-psychotics | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 11 September 2001 03:07 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
FBI. CIA. Maybe even the Mossad. But if this was not an attack by a foreign government then there should not be any large-scale military retaliation. You can't fight a war against private citizens of a foreign nation.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dawna Matrix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 156

posted 11 September 2001 04:45 PM      Profile for Dawna Matrix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why hasn't Saddam Hussein's name come up in all this?
From: the stage on cloud 9 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 11 September 2001 05:12 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Because he hasn't been making threats over the past few months.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trellis
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1342

posted 11 September 2001 05:27 PM      Profile for Trellis     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If Bush doesn't bomb someone (and anyone will do), will he be perceived as a weak and ineffectual leader? Will the only thing that can rally american morale be the sight of marines tooling up to kick ass? Probably.
From: Some crappy boghole in western europe | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dawna Matrix
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 156

posted 11 September 2001 05:30 PM      Profile for Dawna Matrix     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Speculating on suspicious silence, mediaboy.
From: the stage on cloud 9 | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 11 September 2001 05:34 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I seriously doubt Iraq could be behind this. The direct retaliation by the US would make the Gulf War bombing look like Fourth of July fireworks. Saddam Hussein is brutal, not suicidal.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 11 September 2001 07:35 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually, I wondered the same thing. Have there been any condolence statements or condemnations out of Iraq or Iran yet? Makes me wonder...

I'm getting a little tired of hearing that this is an "attack on freedom" (just heard Netanyahu repeat it now on Newsworld). It's an attack on the US, and usually when people attack the US it's because they're attacking a LACK of freedom for some people, not the supposed freedom that the US stands for. They're attacking the "freedom" that the US feels they have to dump all over other nations of the world.

I'm not justifying this attack in ANY way, but I just think it's such a self-centred idea that America is the heart of freedom when they do more to promote the economic enslavement of people from developing nations, and when they prop up regimes (including in the Middle East) that stand for anything BUT freedom.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Horseshoe Bend
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1345

posted 11 September 2001 07:48 PM      Profile for Horseshoe Bend     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As per the silence from Tehran and Baghdad, maybe we should remember the Gulf War and the time the US Navy shot down the Iranian airliner. (Also the US supplying the Iraquis during the Iran-Iraq War.) Perhaps crocodile tears would be less comforting than silence, in this case.
From: Cherokee, NC USA | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 11 September 2001 07:49 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good point. Just because you aren't sympathetic doesn't mean you're responsible.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 849

posted 11 September 2001 09:08 PM      Profile for lonewolf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I was alive when Kennedy was shot. As a Canadian kid in Manitoba, I remember being stunned and shocked, feeling like it couldn't be real.
I have the same feeling again, looking at the horrific repeated images. Having read a lot of Tom Clancy novels and seeing a lot of action movies about crashing planes (remember Die Hard?), my logical mind is not surprised.
I speculate: To whose greatest interest is it to do this? Someone in the middle east who wants the US to retaliate against some enemy? Could be Israelis, could be Palestinians, could be Bosnians, etc - in fact anyone who has had the US bomb them or ignore them. What about Iraq? The list goes on and on and on.
This may be a rerun of the nature of the Kennedy assasinations - we may never know.

From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 11 September 2001 09:12 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The ultimate irony would be -- if this group was ideologically hardline -- that most of them were killed during the attacks, and so nobody would be left to burn. I'm sure there's a money trail, though.
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 11 September 2001 09:25 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bush is saying "Terrorist acts can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot shake the foundations of our country.... America was targeted because we are the greatest beacon of freedom in the world, but no one can extinquish that light."

And "...God Bless America."

I wrote that last before he'd finished. Now I'm waiting...bit of the 23rd Psalm...yes.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Parviz Mirbaghi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 289

posted 11 September 2001 09:26 PM      Profile for Parviz Mirbaghi     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Michelle, recently we installed a dish and now we receive five Iranian channels, one directly from Iran, four from California... In the knews of the Iranian channel, the president, Khatami expressed his sadness at the events. Other than this, normal programming has continued. My own comment is that evil breeds evil, and injustice breeds desperation...the money wasted on arm deals and the son of star wars and other kinds of insanity could have relieved so much suffering. In any case, I'll check the Iranian channel every now and then, and will keep you informed if I hear something relevant.
From: Whitby | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
krishna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1242

posted 11 September 2001 09:28 PM      Profile for krishna   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
All this talk of retaliation brings to the fore the need to do all we can to prevent wars. Militarization and globalization only feed the flames.

So... if you havent signed the petition to abolish nuclear weapons and the petition to get Canada to oppose Star Wars, please consider it!

With the NSA demanding another $30billion for "intelligence" work (AP newswire), now begins the lobbying by groups promoting their security solutions. Clearly, one solution is to retaliate against basic human rights.


From: Ottawa and Rideau rivers area | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
PanzerLeader
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1166

posted 11 September 2001 10:57 PM      Profile for PanzerLeader   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dawna, you may be right track, but so is everybody else. This, and I STRESS this theory not fact, that they both Iraq and Bin Laden may both in invloved.
Think of this. Iraq has the men with the training, but Bin Laden has the men and the support in the US. With material support from Iraq and planning from Bin Laden anything could be done.
Just a theory.

[ September 11, 2001: Message edited by: PanzerLeader ]


From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 287

posted 11 September 2001 11:05 PM      Profile for Marc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I definitely would not rule out an Iraqi/Bin Laden coalition...however, Bin Laden is the fall guy. This plan probably took several years to develop and without a doubt Bin Laden would be so far away that there is probably no way that the CIA or any other group could ever find him. Bin Laden knew exactly when this was going to happen and he had a several week head start that he used to bury himself somewhere...he will probably never be found. This was his coup de grace.

[ September 11, 2001: Message edited by: Marc ]


From: Calgary, AB | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
PanzerLeader
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1166

posted 11 September 2001 11:07 PM      Profile for PanzerLeader   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Marc, he knows he is a marked a man is going to die for this, he has nonthing to loose. Also he wants to get to those forty virgins
From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 287

posted 11 September 2001 11:20 PM      Profile for Marc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that if Iraq was the sole perpetrator of this attack the CIA definitely would have found out about it beforehand...the CIA has always had trouble following Bin Laden. Bin Laden was able to co-ordinate the bombing of two embassies in Africa virtually simultaneously and was able to take the side out of one of the most technologically advanced ships in the entire world.
From: Calgary, AB | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 11 September 2001 11:20 PM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The policies of militarism pursued by the United States have resulted in millions of deaths, from the historic tragedy of the Indochina war, through the funding of death squads in Central America and Colombia, to the sanctions and air strikes against Iraq. This nation is the largest supplier of
"conventional weapons" in the world - and those weapons fuel the starkest kind of terrorism from Indonesia to Africa. The
early policy of support for armed resistance in Afghanistan resulted in the victory of the Taliban - and the creation of Osama Bin Laden.

We are one world. We shall live in a state of fear and terror or we shall move toward a future in which we seek peaceful alternatives to conflict and a more just
distribution of the world's resources. As we mourn the many lives lost, our hearts call out for reconciliation, not revenge.

[ September 11, 2001: Message edited by: Pimji ]


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
PanzerLeader
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1166

posted 11 September 2001 11:26 PM      Profile for PanzerLeader   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CIA like any operations is far from perfect. They may not have been looking in the right place. Who would believe yesterday this could happen. Also I wonder if the black boxes made it. I know they are built tough, but this....I do not know. I fear this may become the new MO of Groups. Just look at the damage. More than any bomber could hope for. This is only the beginning. It will not stop now. Also Bin Laden and others may try and top the attack. I shudder to think what is more than this.
From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
PanzerLeader
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1166

posted 11 September 2001 11:29 PM      Profile for PanzerLeader   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Pimji, you live in a make believe land. But hey if want those who are behind this be my guest. But I do not think they will listen to you. Why should they, what do you know.
From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 12 September 2001 12:04 AM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The US can go ahead and kill more people in retaliation but I highly doubt it will achieve peace.
Why do you have the name "Panzerleader"? Are you a Nazi? The name insinuates hatred rasism and fear. Is this what you practise or is it your fantasy?
If you are not removed from this board I will remove myself.
Like Socrataire I too, may be handing in my resignation.

From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
PanzerLeader
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1166

posted 12 September 2001 12:17 AM      Profile for PanzerLeader   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Who said the US answers is about achieving peace? This is about getting even. Why Panzerleader, I am armour buff and was in a silly mood when I picked the name. Can't the heat, then get out of the fire.
From: Ottawa, Ontario | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Meow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1247

posted 12 September 2001 01:06 AM      Profile for Meow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Pimji, I feel you said a lot of things I have been internalizing for the past day.

When I heard about the bombs falling in Kabul, I felt the same kind of sickness when I watched the planes crash into the world trade center.

Two wrongs don't make a right. They are still killing innocent people. Why escalate the conflict? Maybe I am naive. But that kind of "retaliation" doesn't seem ethical.....and indeed hypocritical...why create another human tragedy?


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 12 September 2001 01:14 AM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thank You Meow
The US government and its military industrial have no desire for peace. That we agree on. Are you surprised this has happened today? I would guess that like myself you are not.
Half of the taxes collected from US taxpayers fund thier military. The US military has trained and funded the very terrorists who kill their own selves. Many of the terrorists that have struck the world have been trained directly or indirectly by the U.S. and have been finanically supported by the U.S. government. While we don't know who planned this attack, perspective in the U.S.'s role in international terrorism is essential.

Ramzi Ahmed Yousef traveled to Afghanistan to join the Mujahedeen rebels in their fight against Soviet occupiers, and there learned the guerrilla techniques he would later employ in New York. Who supported the Mujahedeen and paid for Yousef's training in terrorism? The United States Central Intelligence Agency, who funneled the Afghan rebels millions of U.S. taxpayers dollars.

Timothy McVeigh was another angry young man, one who had to drop out of college, couldn't find a steady job, and moved from trailer park to trailer park as an adult, wondering if the American Dream included him. He did what a lot of economically-disadvantaged young kids do, and enlisted in the U.S. Army (this has been described by some as "the poverty draft").
Another terrorist trained by the United States government.

This is a time to look inward. I have my doubts that this will happen and there will be a return to the base reaction of hatred racism and retribution and its continuing cycel of violent death and misery. I will never cooperate in this cylce of ill will. The military types can ridicule me. They have my permission.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: Pimji ]


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 September 2001 01:15 AM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just a moment, though. The Americans have denied bombing the airport in Kabul. A northern Afghan rebel group has claimed responsibility, not for the New York and Washington attacks, but for the attack in Afghanistan.

For once I'm inclined to believe both. The Americans, while I fear they might retaliate with massive overkill, won't do so without some clear evidence. They would lose support among their allies, although at this point they might not care about that.

Meanwhile, don't forget that the Taliban haven't achieved complete control over Afghanistan, and still have some internal opposition.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
stile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 659

posted 12 September 2001 01:23 AM      Profile for stile   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Congratulations to the terrorists for a bold, courageous, and brilliantly planned strike.

The US has finally gotten a taste of its own medicine.

In the last 100 years, the US has committed the most atrocious war crimes the world has ever known. And yet they have not been taken to justice for even a single one of those crimes. Meanwhile they prance around the globe ravaging peoples and lands for their economic benefit. They even stop to punish fellow NON-American war criminals here and there. What hypocrites!

The US has committed too many war crimes to mention, so I will focus on the most obvious and easily the worst: the 1945 atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Instanly Killed: 110,000
Instantly Injured (visibly: includes burned, blinded, maimed,etc.) : 130,000
Irradiated: 300,000+
1950 death toll: 340, 000

Patients receving care in 1990 for atomic bomb related radiation sickness:
350,000+

People are still dieing today from leukemia, cancer, and other radiation related diseases. Children of the survivors often suffer from radiation related sicknesses (eg: leukemia).

Yet we know that the US did not have to commit this inhuman atrocity in order to end the war. Japan was already decimated by conventional bombing (100,000 died in the fire bombing of Tokyo – 1 million injured).

Korea, Vietnam, Iraq – all received horrifying civilian casualties.

Children massacred alone by the US is easily 100 times the number of grown men killed today in New York.

So, rich, white-bread America, after 100 years of fucking over the planet, maybe a little justice has finally been served today.


From: B.C. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 12 September 2001 01:25 AM      Profile for Trisha     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Panzerleader, I am highly offended by your cavalier attitude. While the rest of us are concerned about where these events will lead and our own mixed feelings about what should be done about it, you seem to be taking the opportunity to attack people. Maybe that is your reaction to fear and terror, I don't know but I really think you should curb the personal attacks and, if you can't share our feelings, have enough respect for others to stick to the subject.

I, for one, could have lost someone in this attack and don't want to know someone else is going through the same feelings I have had all day. I see no glory in killing the innocent for what a small, fanatical group has done. There are other ways of attaining justice.


From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pimji
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 228

posted 12 September 2001 01:33 AM      Profile for Pimji   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I too believe both. The point is that any type of violent action will only maintain or escalate the violence.
The pain that the US military and its intellegence organization has cuased throughout the world is starting to come back home to roost. The US taxpayers are in effect funding their own misery by the hands of those who they allow to control the purse strings.

Sidenote:
"No to NATO! Festival of Creative NonViolence"
Saturday, October 6, at 1 p.m.
Gathering at the US Embassy (MacKenzie Ave.)

The military industrial complex will not have my co-operation.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: Pimji ]


From: South of Ottawa | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 12 September 2001 01:36 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Some here seem to be sugesting that the West should drop capitalism (to be replaced with nothing) and give all the money and material things away to the rest of the world and above all, refuse to hit anyone who hits us.

I ask to what end? So that all peoples of North America can live in poverty with absolutly no way to change it? Then everyone could be all nice an equal in our suffering.

This crap about the poor long suffering terrorists and how we made them makes me sick. Those people who commited this heinous act of the most foul nature are nothing but brainwashed misfits that are fit to live in any civilized country on the face of the earth. There is absolutly nothing that anyone could do to make them happy other than to die. So if the choice is us or them, then fuck them, I am for us.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 12 September 2001 01:44 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
There are other ways of attaining
justice.

Yes I am sure that if we pour a few hundred billion dollars into the country these terrorist came from that all the other terrorists in the world will certainly avoid commiting acts like those of today on the U.S. Do you think that any of those families who now don't have mothers or fathers or children are offended any?


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 12 September 2001 01:46 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Congratulations to the terrorists for a bold, courageous, and brilliantly planned strike.

This is sick Stile.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 287

posted 12 September 2001 01:49 AM      Profile for Marc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
stile, are you justifying blowing up American buildings and killing innocent American lives for past atrocities? Isn't it kinda hypocritical? Aren't you as bad as panzerleader? I think that we (meaning leftists) are blinded by our anti-American ideas. I, too am 100% against the capitalist American attitude and am against the atrocities that they have committed in the past but if you are so blinded by your ideology that you cannot see what happened today as a tragedy then I feel pity for you.
From: Calgary, AB | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 12 September 2001 01:58 AM      Profile for Trisha     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stile has a point. The U.S. has done to other countries what was done yesterday--- EXCEPT--- that was during a war. This is terrorism. The U.S., like any other business, has sold to the highest bidder and often has been on the side of groups I don't agree with, but right now they are not at war with anybody. The events of Tuesday morning were a declaration of war, but were they made by any country or just a small faction inside a country? That, to me, is what makes a difference.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: Trisha ]


From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 12 September 2001 02:08 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
George Bush (the elder) and other Reagan-era foreign policymakers ought to be feeling pretty dumb now about what they did to make events like what happened today more likely. Just how it follows from that that ten thousand Americans deserve to be dead and millions of people around the world deserve to be terrified, I don't know.

You're following the same sort of insane logic the terrorists probably used to justify their acts to themselves.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 12 September 2001 02:11 AM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So if the choice is us or them, then fuck them, I am for us.

One might claim you’ve just become one of them, Slick Willy.
I think maybe the key point here is whether you view this as a premeditated attack against the U.S., or just a reaction that one might naturally expect as a result of U.S. policy. I don’t think anyone here would seriously suggest the U.S. do nothing. I find it hard to believe that some people like me might whine and complain about [insert your own war criminal here] getting off and yet turn around and not expect someone to be held accountable for the murder of countless thousands in New York.
But who the hell am I? The only vision of “justice” I can see is the examples I have around me: people should be tried and jailed for this. Didn’t they just catch someone in connection with an Air India, or Lockerbie bombing not long ago? Yeah, the justice is slow, and yeah, the justice may never attained, but what’s the alternative?
Can you try and convict a belief system? And if you do, would you then come after me because my beliefs differ from yours? Can you “surgically strike” things so your nation gets “closure”, and then expect everything to be better after that?
Should we resort to a war of attrition?

I think this event nicely ties in almost everything that has been debated on this board.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 287

posted 12 September 2001 02:14 AM      Profile for Marc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What is his point? There is no war...until now. This was an unprovoked, undeserved, and vicious attack that took away thousands of innocent lives. There is NO justification of such destruction... I am sorry but if leftists are unable to see that this attack was wrong I REALLY should re-evaluate which side of the spectrum I belong to. I thought that peace was the goal that leftists had. This attack was wrong...think about the lives that were taken away...they were not the ones that dropped the bomb on Japan they were INNOCENT people going to work and going home to see their families on airplanes that were hijacked and flown into buildings and into the ground. What if there are people on Babble who lost family and friends in this attack? I simply CANNOT believe that you could possibly say it was their own fault that they were killed...with the only reason being that they are American. That is wrong.
From: Calgary, AB | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 September 2001 02:15 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As a disclaimer, I find what happened today to be a terrible atrocity committed against humanity. Any act of violence, committed by any one for any reason is deplorable and inexcusable. We can rationalize our acts of violence. So can they. So can any one. However, I found the following on indymedia, and I think it is worth repeating, here:

September 11, 2001

Scream in silence.

Yeah, it’s a line from a Green Day song. It’s what I have been doing all day and I don’t want to hold it in anymore. I feel like I’m drowning in questions. Each question brings about more questions and so on and so on. I can relate to the hippies in the 60’s that used the term “heavy”. Cause these questions carry a lot of weight. And a lot of it is stuff that is so disturbing.

“Dad! Turn on the TV, it’s sooooo amazing…..”

That’s how I woke up this morning.

“What’s so amazing?” I ask my 6 year old son.

“A plane just blew up a building!”

Huh? A plane? “Jake, you’re not supposed to watch movies in the morning before school”.

“No Dad, just turn on the TeeeeeVeeeee…”

I watch the building fall to the ground and it hits me square in the gut that this is not a movie, not some cool Hollywood graphics. It real. It’s a real building. A building that I’ve actually stood in before. My hands start to shake and my legs get weak. As I sit on the edge of the bed tears start to run from my eyes. And the questions start rapid fire in my brain.
--Bush vowed to bring those responsible for the attacks to justice as he stopped in Louisiana to talk to the nation. ``Make no mistake, the United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts'' the president said.
Why did this happen? How could this happen? Okay, so that took a few milliseconds for my brain to come up with those. More questions.
Am I really surprised? Wasn’t it just a matter of time? Haven’t we brought this upon ourselves with our arrogant American lifestyle? Is this a payback for the war we waged in Iraq and the bombs we’ve been dropping on them ever since? Why doesn’t the news call it a terrorist attack when the United States uses military jets and missiles to blow up a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan or civilian targets in Iraq. Is it all in the name of oil, so that I can pull up to the pump in my 12 mile to the gallon truck? Is it true that the United States uses several times its share of the world’s resources? Are the vast majority of people on Earth suffering from global capitalism while we sit in our big houses running the air conditioning watching our big screen TV’s?
Lot’s of questions. But hey, that’s just scratching the surface man. I’ve got ten more for each those. And then ten more for the ten more. And those aren’t even the tough ones. Tough is, how do I explain this to my kids? Or better yet- am I willing to do anything to change it? Here’s a good one- if I do nothing to change, how do I explain that to my kids…?
If you have any answers I could sure use them because from where I sit it sure feels like I’ve got blood on my hands.
--The only way we can increase security is by preventing the United States military and multi-national businesses from exploiting people from Nicaragua to Indonesia. So long as the United States bleeds other countries of their resources with the combined might of the Pentagon and Wall Street banks, everyone in the United States is a potential target. These attacks are the natural and logical conclusion of global capitalism. We must break the cycle by demanding our rights as humans and confronting the upper classes that are pillaging people and resources alike around the globe.
On the carpet are my kids shoes. They’re a pair of Vans. Got them for $29 and it was buy 1 get 1 free. How about that coffee table from Costco? That was pretty cheap too. Wonder where they were made? And under what conditions? Probably not in a climate controlled room with ergonomic seating. Why don’t we think about stuff like this every day? How can it be OK for so few to benefit while so many suffer? How did I get so numb? What the hell is important anymore?
As the hours pass, I watch the screen and the same talking heads spit out the same old crap. I look around at my big house, nice green lawn, swimming pool, couple of new cars in the driveway. Happy shiny people. Do any of us really stop to think at what cost this all comes? Maybe today would be a good time to start ‘cause someone just gave us a hell of a warning.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 12 September 2001 02:20 AM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry, Marc... Are you responding to what I said, just for clarification?
From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 September 2001 02:20 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry for the doublepost, but indymedia posters are reporting gasoline prices are rising to as much as $7 per gallon in some areas.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 287

posted 12 September 2001 02:21 AM      Profile for Marc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry that was for Trisha...you managed to slip your post in while I was typing mine.
From: Calgary, AB | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 12 September 2001 02:25 AM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hehe... wouldn't want to be caught in friendly fire!
WingNut... the oil companies stated (at least in Canada) that they will cap pump prices for the time being.
The wonders of a rational market!

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 12 September 2001 02:25 AM      Profile for Trisha     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think Marc was responding to my post. I should have put "except" in caps to point out that the only point he had was that the U.S. had bombed cities, not that I agreed with the rest of the post. I do not agree with killing the innocent, but I also don't agree that doing nothing in this case is right. Someone I know could have been in that building if it was a different day. However, I strongly feel that first the U.S. should find out who actually was behind this and go after them specifically. If it was not a country, the whole country should not be punished. Two wrongs only make three wrongs.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: Trisha ]


From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
stile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 659

posted 12 September 2001 02:30 AM      Profile for stile   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, I am not a heartless bastard. Of course I feel for the innocent who were killed.

My point is that there is SO MANY innocents being killed all around the world every day, and for so many years this has been happening.

And as Wingnut's article so eloquently points out - we in North America sit on our ergonic chairs comfortably reading the stock market reports and not spending one second of our luxurious days caring for those who suffer (and have suffered) so that we can be so comfortable.

Yes it is a tragedy, and violence is a terrible thing, but the US needed a slap in the face to say: you can't keep raping the world cost free.

Unfortunately, I fear the slap in the face will only backfire.


From: B.C. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 September 2001 02:33 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Trisha, it is never a country. I asked before, if it were turn out to be a Canadian, would the U.S. be justified in bombing our cities?

Some U.S. reactionaries are demanded a nuclear retaliation.

If it was bin Laden, the Afghan people are suffering terribly under the Taliban regime. Why should they pay for the policies of a government they do not even support? Do they not suffer enough already?

Do you know Afghan woman are not allowed to work? Even if they are widowed or unmarried? They are forced to beg?

Their windows must be covered to prevent them from being visible from the street. They are denied schooling. many are denied health care. Do we bomb them for bin Laden's actions? How is that justice?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 12 September 2001 02:35 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The trouble when it comes to terrorism is that the links between terrorist groups and states are often quite fuzzy not to mention that there is some sharing of resources among groups. It might not be absolutely clear to what extent a given state or states are involved.
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Marc
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 287

posted 12 September 2001 02:39 AM      Profile for Marc     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Bin Laden (who I believe is responsible) was not thinking about things like Hiroshima when he organized this scheme...the reason I believe that he hates America so much is the fact that the United States supports Israel rather than Palestine. To me, this is absolutely no reason to kill thousands of Americans...he would have no problem attacking Canada as well because we also openly support Israel...he has called us "little Satan". We have not committed anything like Hiroshima. These attacks are not based on a rational fear but instead based on racial hatred.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: Marc ]


From: Calgary, AB | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 12 September 2001 02:44 AM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, a little Satan he can conviently hide people in.

[a CBC documentary is in my background and influenced me to say this]

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 12 September 2001 02:46 AM      Profile for Trisha     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know all that, that is part of the reason I don't think the country should be bombed. I think efforts should be made to find the criminal responsible and his devoted followers. The problem often is the faction in power does not reflect the people they are controlling. It is always the people who suffer. There's a documentary on right now about Canada being used by terrorists. This could happen to any country. It is the group who actually do the deed that is to blame. The U.S. has harboured their own criminals and terrorists in the past and likely in the future.

It's not that easy for me to explain. I am still upset about not being sure if the person I know was in this or not for most of the day. I want to see the responsible people found and punished, but I would prefer it be done with as few innocent deaths as possible.


From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 September 2001 02:48 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Don't kid yourself Marc. The U.S. intelligence community has a long history with bin Laden. Here is an MSNBC report of his dealings on behalf of the CIA in Afghanistan:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/190144.asp#BODY

bin Laden parted company with the U.S. not over Israel but over the Gulf war. This, in his mind (as sick as it may be), is payback.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 12 September 2001 04:26 AM      Profile for Slick Willy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So I guess what you're saying is that when one country invades another without provocation, NATO countries should just turn a blind eye, even if we have economic ties with the invaded country because we don't want to get involved? Iraq wasn't some poor distraught country invaded by Kuwait. They were give channce after chance to end that invasion and use diplomacy to resolve the issues. Hussain would have none of that and promised the "Mother of all wars!" should NATO get involved.

All over the world there are people who are so screwed up that no matter what they will not stop fighting. Those who flee their own countries to get away from the fighting are welcomed in our countries as refugees and helped to make their own way here. We also try to get the fighting factions to stop killing and talk with each other to resolve the conflicts. When one side refuses while the other acts in good faith and tries to resolve them we offer what is need to to protect them from their enemies so if nothing else they can fight their own battles.

If anything is our fault it is that we tried to play world cop and take care of the bad guys for far to many people around the world.

If you thought Americans and capitalism was bad before today, I suggest you sit yourself down and have a stiff drink because you're going to see what hell on earth is now that they are pissed right off.


From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 September 2001 09:19 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So I guess what you're saying is that when one country invades another without provocation, NATO countries should just turn a blind eye, even if we have economic ties with the invaded country because we don't want to get involved?

Gosh, no. I didn't say that. That would be apples and oranges.

quote:

Iraq wasn't some poor distraught country invaded by Kuwait. They were give channce after chance to end that invasion and use diplomacy to resolve the issues. Hussain would have none of that and promised the
"Mother of all wars!" should NATO get involved.

Yes, the U.S. was entirely unequivocal with Iraq when the U.S. ambassador, in response to the question of invasion from the Iraqi ambassador, replied: "We have no position on that."

quote:

All over the world there are people who are so screwed up that no matter what they will not stop fighting.

Are you saying those people in oppressed regimes all over the world should just say "uncle?" Or which people should just stop fighting? What are they fighting against?

quote:

Those who flee their own countries to get away from the fighting are welcomed in our countries as refugees and helped to make their own way here. We also try to get the fighting factions to stop killing and talk with each other to resolve the conflicts.

What fantasy world do you live in? The same one as those Afghan refugees just turned away from Australia? The same ones as the Haitian boat people deported from the U.S. during the turmoil, there? The only refugees welcome in the West, particularly the U.S., are refugees from Cuba and/or China.

quote:

When one side refuses while the other acts in good faith and tries to resolve them we offer what is need to to protect them from their enemies so if nothing else they can fight their own battles.

Really? Example?

quote:

If anything is our fault it is that we tried to play world cop and take care of the bad guys for far to many people around the world.

Us? Who is us? You mean U.S.? Who asked them to? The East Timorese? The cops never came. The Rwawandans? The cops never came. The Palwstinians? They haven't killed the deputy. Black South Africans? White South Africa was a democracy. The cop only arrives when his very specific interests, or prestige, is threatened. Other than that, he might even prefer the criminal to the victim such as in East Timor and South Africa.

quote:

If you thought Americans and capitalism was bad before today, I suggest you sit yourself down and have a stiff drink because you're going to see what hell on earth is now that they are pissed right off.

Maybe. Half the world, however, have been quite familiar with hell on earth for decades, now.

Edited to add to world cop issue

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Horseshoe Bend
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1345

posted 12 September 2001 11:39 AM      Profile for Horseshoe Bend     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My understanding is that Bin Laden's first objection to the US was its presence in the country that has the responsibility of taking care of Mecca and Medina. He thought that the Saudis should take care of themselves in the face of Iraq's threat, not non-Muslims.

Palestine is a part of Bin Laden's ideology, not the whole.


From: Cherokee, NC USA | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
JJRosso
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 720

posted 12 September 2001 07:17 PM      Profile for JJRosso     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stiles (and a few others who have the courage to refute the Empire's brainwashing) got it absolutely correct. All the people who disagree are directly or indirectly supporting US imperialism and neo-fascism all over the world -- the cause of terrorist acts against the United States. If anyone still disagrees, refute the claims made by the author in my posting Who's Responsibilty (under NEWS), otherwise stop your nonsense babbling.

JJR


From: vernon bc | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ian the second
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 732

posted 12 September 2001 07:27 PM      Profile for Ian the second   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, you think that the terrorists were justified?


..?
<
=


Ian


From: Toronto City, Toronto | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 September 2001 08:17 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If you're being deliberately provocative, I2, trying to start a flamewar... well, it might work, but I sincerely hope it won't.

Folks, I suggest we all do what we hope (against hope) the US will do, and when faced with such questions, exercise a little restraint.

In that connection, I regret my earlier snap-back to I2 on the "dreaded issue" thread."

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 September 2001 09:39 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
'lance, I don't think Ian was trying to start a flamewar - I think he was responding to the flameworthy command made by JJRosso to people who disagree with him to "stop your nonsense babbling".

It amazes me how babblers are so often blind to rude comments and personal attacks made by the more leftist members of babble (I would say calling people's opinions "nonsense babbling" to be ad hominem), but are quick to criticize those who are not quite so leftist for their comments...

And no, I'm not trying to start a flamewar either. I'm just saying let's be fair here. "Stop your nonsense babbling" is just as much of a debate stopper as asking someone if they think the terrorism was justified.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
judym
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 29

posted 12 September 2001 09:53 PM      Profile for judym   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If anyone still disagrees, refute the claims made by the author in my posting Who's Responsibilty (under NEWS), otherwise stop your nonsense babbling.

And who made JJ Rosso king, anyway? JJR, you have no place dictating who can be active on this board and who must leave. If you aren't comfortable with open discussion, you are not obliged to stay.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: judym ]


From: earth | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 12 September 2001 10:53 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Michelle:
In all due respect(I'm not being sarcastic,you are nothing but gracious and even handed)I think you may be being a little unfair classifying leftist as such.

I can only speak for myself but sometimes it is difficult to be always tolerant.
Earlier I was accused of starting a flame war(wounded I was;poor sensitive soul that I am) due to an admittedly sarcastic response to another babbler.
It's just that sometimes I am at a loss on how to respond to certain forms of rhetoric;such as when people say "I'm not racist but..." Or I'm not violent etc.
In my humble opinion if you are making an argument for aggressive military response to recent events you are a war-monger. Also if someone claims that institutionalized racism no longer exists I might suggest this position is racist. This might seem a bit extreme but that's how I see it.

I really do try to be more tolerant but my Fenian temper gets the best of me sometimes.
I also apologize because this really doesn't have alot to do with the thread.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
JJRosso
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 720

posted 13 September 2001 05:06 AM      Profile for JJRosso     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ian the Second, who refused to challenge the argument, asks:

"So, you think that the terrorists were justified?"

My answer is:
I reject terrorism as it only leads to deaths of innocent people! Progress can only be achieved through political and economic education which would stop exploitation and massive poverty at home and by stopping imperialism abroad – the cause of massive exploitation and wars around the world.

Secondly, terrorism generally erodes mass movements and creates fear which make people more resistant to change. Thirdly, terrorism its a boon to the ruling elite who never did like democracy and now have an excuse to further erode it and civil rights such as assembly, privacy and "due process of law". It gives the elite further excuses to extend repression under the guise of "national security"!

However, as to terrorism in the poor countries where people are forced to tolerate humiliating poverty, economic plunder and police-state tactics for foreign interests that is another question. When the impoverished people attempt democracy or strive for decent conditions, they are normally murdered by "right-wing" death squads in almost all cases financed by the United States as in Colombia and dozens of other countries today. (The plight of the Palestinians are given in the topic Who's Responsible.) The conditions are imposed upon the people by their corrupt leaders serving the interests of a handful of dominant imperialist powers led by the United States. And if nations refuse to co-operate they'll suffer the wrath of the US – as Mosadegh, Lamumba, Allende and dozens of others, or Grenada, Nicaragua or Yugoslavia has experienced recently. Hence it is this betrayal of their government leaders and the forces of imperialism which impels people to strike back with whatever means are available to them!

The solution to terrorism is to eliminate the cause of this foreign-induced poverty and creating democracies of the people and for the people; and economic and social equality and a nation's right to self-determination – not "rigged elections' and neoliberal concepts by intervening foreign interests.

Unfortunately, it is United States in concert with its NATO allies which are undermining such concepts. They are constantly ignoring or violating international laws and treaties without being prosecuted – because of the power of the United States. US Secretary of State Colin Powell said recently, "Terrorism is part of the dark side of globalization. However, sadly, it is part of doing business in the world – business we as Americans are not going to stop doing."

Noam Chomsky, in response to such as question of Ian's said:
"We have a choice. We can express justified horror, or we can seek to understand what may have led to the crimes, which means making an effort to enter the minds of the likely perpetrators. If we choose the latter course, we can do no better, I think, than to listen to the words of Robert Fisk, whose direct knowledge and insight into affairs of the region is unmatched after many years of distinguished reporting."

Describing "The wickedness and awesome cruelty of a crushed and humiliated people," he writes that "this is not the war of democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the coming days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes and US helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and American shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese militia - paid and uniformed by America's Israeli ally - hacking and raping and murdering their way through refugee camps." And much more. Again, we have a choice: we may try to understand, or refuse to do so, contributing to the likelihood that much worse lies ahead.

JJR


From: vernon bc | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
wagepeace
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 114

posted 13 September 2001 06:01 AM      Profile for wagepeace     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
JJ is completely wrong because he fails to address the psychological requirement for retaliating: read between the lines!

Every senior Bush administration official is preparing Americans for a war-footing! This marks a dramatic shift in US foreign policy and there is a psychological need for a military response: people need to feel that they are being defended.

There is unprecedented support from intellegence agencies who, up until this past Tuesday would be at odds with US intellegence - old enemies are talking about cooperation, both in military and humanitarian assistance.

There are some causes that are worth fighting for and this would be one of them. Moreover, I think that Americans are fully aware of what they are getting themselves into and are prepared to accept the fact that there will be American casualties.

If indeed US policy in the past has been to let other countries fight for the US and support them in the way of economic and military aid, it is becoming quite clear the America is prepared to fight this one out using it's own people.

From a military perspective, we are seeing the birth of a new strategy that has yet to be named. The terrorist showed that there are no longer traditional rules of engagement. I would expect that the US response will be a military one, but perhaps the tactics will change - perhaps it is going to include what I call, "plain clothed soldiers".

Look for an increase in espionage and guerilla tactics from the US.


From: In a fog and on anti-psychotics | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 13 September 2001 09:52 AM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Someone in the Globe on Wed. mentioned that the US is very adverse to having soldiers lost in combat theatres. It gave the bombing of Serbia (just an air strike) and Somalia (they left after losing a couple soldiers).
Could this aversion over possible casualities be a thing of the past?

Another article also says that Clinton had definite links between Iraq and the WTC bombing in 1993. Clinton refused to follow up on the possible Iraqi (read: state) connection. This expert believes yesterday was the result of that unwillingness to do anything. (Globe, Wed, "Who is to blame" by Laurie Mylorie).


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 13 September 2001 11:06 AM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
This illustrates the problems the US has in deciding what to do. To do nothing sends the message that foreign nations can hide behind "individual terrorists" with impunity. To strike without an official declaraction of war from the other side will be seen as war-mongering. It's a terrible catch-22 the US finds itself in, and I don't envy them.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 13 September 2001 11:30 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
JJR, your last post expresses my feelings exactly - I reject any kind of terrorism, but we have to acknowledge the terrorism sponsored by the US if we want to understand and stop the downward spiral of violence before it even starts. Unfortunately, so many people are so unaware of the US complicity in the terrorism that goes on in international conflicts that they don't understand why anyone would feel that way. This isn't a special form of terrorism because it finally happened to us instead of them. It is horrifying no matter who it happens to. If we are truly as "civilized" as all those US officials keep saying we are, then we'd better think about stopping the violence rather than revenge.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
wagepeace
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 114

posted 13 September 2001 12:21 PM      Profile for wagepeace     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For a list of known terrorist organizations, click here:

Terrorists and their ilk


From: In a fog and on anti-psychotics | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 13 September 2001 12:35 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
That's a pretty small list. What about the KKK? What about the IRA? What about other non-muslim groups?
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 13 September 2001 12:45 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good point. And another point - where's the line drawn between a terrorist and a freedom fighter? American revolutionaries were probably considered terrorists (or whatever term was popular and conveyed the same idea) at the time too. I was looking over the Mujahedin Khalq, the Iranian group who fights against what they consider (and the US considers if you look at their state reports) to be a brutal regime. Are they freedom fighters or terrorists?

Well, I don't know enough about them to know, but I've seen their websites, and their main activity is publicizing atrocities committed by the state, which no one would hear about otherwise, although they have also committed violent acts too.

I wonder how many of those groups are financed by the US in some way?

Edited to say that the IRA is on the list, under "Continuity Irish Republican Army". The "Orange Volunteers" is on there too. You're right about the KKK though. And what about all those little militia organizations in the hills of the US? Unless they're considered to be more cultish than terrorist.

[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 13 September 2001 02:15 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
'lance, I don't think Ian was trying to start a flamewar - I think he was responding to the flameworthy command made by JJRosso to people who disagree with him to "stop your nonsense babbling".

It amazes me how babblers are so often blind to rude comments and personal attacks made by the more leftist members of babble (I would say calling people's opinions "nonsense babbling" to be ad hominem), but are quick to criticize those who are not quite so leftist for their comments...


Believe me, I'm not blind to rudeness and personal attacks regardless of the source. It's got nothing to do with left or right or up or down.

I just happened to miss that particular bit of nastiness, is all. Like anyone else, there are times when I don't read carefully.

I'm trying to get back to my usual practice: read, think, repeat; (possibly) post; do not alter this order whatever the provocation.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
judym
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 29

posted 13 September 2001 02:40 PM      Profile for judym   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Who Is Ousmane Bin Laden?
by Michel Chossudovsky
Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa


An outline of the history of Ousmane Bin Laden and the links of the Islamic "Jihad" to the formulation of US foreign policy during the Cold War and its aftermath.


From: earth | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
JJRosso
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 720

posted 13 September 2001 02:49 PM      Profile for JJRosso     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The largest terrorist organization in the world by far is the CIA which was financed to the tune of $25 billion in the 1980s when I stopped having interest in them. The second largest terrorist group is that of the Israelis who not only have mass assassination programs against the Palestinians but do the "dirty work" of the US all over the world from previously supporting the neo-fascist aparthied regime in South Africa to aiding the Contras in Nicaragua.

As my previously stated article above pointed out the imperialist nature of US capitalism, propaganda is now increasing and stirring up the public to accept more US warlike measures for retaliation -- which will invariably be contrary to all international laws. Even the CBC is promoting this warlike terrorism by constantly repeating threats by ignorant Americans who say "we should nuke all these countries who harbour terrorists back to the stone age" (paraphrased).

The next step could well be to bring back the War Measures act and stop all "babble-like" comments on the internet (and on the streets).

JJR


From: vernon bc | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 13 September 2001 03:16 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
ABC News has four commentators on right now to comment on why so many people hate the United States.
http://abcnews.go.com/

[ September 13, 2001: Message edited by: Kneel before MediaBoy ]


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 13 September 2001 03:49 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
JJR, if that's what happens, we will all have to make doubly sure to keep speaking up for what we believe in. Maybe we can't post our opinions on the internet, but I'll be damned if I stop saying what I think is right on the streets.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 13 September 2001 07:14 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
While we are thinking about bombing Afghanistan back into the stone age, we might want to reflect on the fact they are already there. The following is a heartbreaking account od life in Afghanistan today:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=world&contentId= A15359-2001Mar16

Maybe some can see the sense in inflicting more misery on these people. Because, Like Iraq, it is the people who pay.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eddie Lear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 362

posted 13 September 2001 07:54 PM      Profile for Eddie Lear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dawna Matrix wrote " Why hasn't Saddam Husseins name come up" Excellent question actually it has this whole thing reeks of hime considering that this would very hard to pull off without the help of a state.Iraq is i think the only Arab nation not to offer condolences,he has motive coming out of his ears and he has proved his ability to conduct clandestine operations under a microscope. Also this is strangly simaler to the very first day of the Gulf War,the high profile simultaneous attacks,many civilians murdered.
From: Port Colborne, Ont | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 13 September 2001 08:18 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe the USA's microscope was a little out of focus for the last 10 years.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 13 September 2001 10:36 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I found an excellent article in Slate magazines explainer. Before anybody defends or tries to justify why Bin Laden should NOT be brought to justice they should read what he demands.

What does Osama Bin Laden want from the U.S?

This man, his organization want from the U.S. and the world something that is wrong. They want a state where anyone non islamic is not welcome.

These people need to be eradicated whether they were directly responsible for the attacks or not. Clearly they are willing, able and desire to commit acts like this against the U.S. and all other non islamic citizens.

We have a clear target. And the organizations that support them through funds and recruiting.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 13 September 2001 11:10 PM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Which is, at core, the problem. There's little to no political accommodation to be made with extreme Islamism and Middle Eastern governments, by not allowing even moderate Islamists legitimate participation in politics make any sort of process of moderation and democratization of Islamism impossible.

The interesting question for the future is whether the real ideologues involved can be separated from their more politically-oriented supporters.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 13 September 2001 11:37 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
These people need to be eradicated whether they were directly responsible for the attacks or not.

Do you feel the same about white supremacists and black separtists? Or is this attitude directed only toward Islamic extremists?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 12:29 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nothing like bombing some no-good sandniggers to make your day, WingNut.

(Disclaimer: This is sarcasm. Repeat: This is sarcasm. It is not indicative of my viewpoints.)


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 12:42 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I feel the same way about all those who state they desire to commit acts such as those perpretrated Tuesday.

DrC. Your sarcasm is starting to be wasted.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 12:47 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I feel the same way about all those who state they desire to commit acts such as those perpretrated Tuesday.

So you would strap all the right-wing KKK/Neo-Nazi members into the electric chair, and you would gladly have the entire Yugoslavian region pulverized into dust and you would have all the black anti-honkey militants chucked into outer space?

Well, at least I can't fault you for lack of consistency.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 12:49 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Markbo, please answer my question:

quote:

These people need to be eradicated whether they were directly responsible for the attacks or not.

Do you feel the same about white supremacists and black separtists? Or is this attitude directed only toward Islamic extremists?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 12:52 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I will not let you reframe my answers. DrC you can try to put words in my mouth all day long but you will accomplish nothing.

I wish to eradicate any threat to the civilian lives such as Tuesdays horrific attack on America.

You don't want to see Bin Ladin's group stopped? Give one reason why?


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 01:03 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Markbo, you are now being inconsistent.
You say we cannot meet the demands of bin Laden's group and those who sympathise with him. His demand being a state only for Islamic people free of the rest of us.

So therefore you say they should be eradicated whether they participated in violence, or not.

But you are unwilling to make the same statement with regard to other groups, The Aryan Nation for example, with similar demands.

Why is that?

I believe the terrorists responisble should be brought to justice. I do not believe in "eradicating" people who might sympathise but have not participated in violence. And my views are consistent. White supremacists who commit acts of violence should be brought to justice. Their sympathisers, in my view, ought not to be "eradicated."


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 01:15 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You don't want to see Bin Ladin's group stopped? Give one reason why?

Hello pot, I'm kettle. You're black!

I didn't say I did not wish to see his group stopped, but to convict his group of the WTC attack before the evidence is in, seems to me to be straining at gnats.

Besides, I'm sure there's a ton of ways to do it without wiping them out. One such would be to capture him and wing him into jail based on the conviction in absentia that's already on record.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 03:02 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey I'm all for bringing him in to the court system.

I keep saying. If he isn't responsible for this specific attack, So What?

The U.S. say they have evidence of his involvement in attacks on embassies and the U.S.S. cole. Why not stop him before he attacks something else?

I'm convicting him of his past statements and acts. Why do you dismiss them so easily?

quote:
His demand being a state only for Islamic people free of the rest of us.

You make it sound so innocent by neglecting the fact he wants Israel gone. Do you support that? You better explain why you just described the elimination of Isreal sound so innocent.

quote:
His demand being a state only for Aryan people free of the rest of us.

Does that sound equally as attractive to you?

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Markbo ]


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 03:26 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The question being asked is if you support wiping out bin Laden's group via military action based on their statements, why not similar domestic right-wing groups who have equally dangerous intentions and have not been shy about stating them?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 03:29 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How many times do I have to say it before you listen. I support the eradication of ALL terrorist groups.

Why don't you?


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 09:37 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Markob it seems you might be a terrorist. You want to "eradicate" people who are guilty of nothing more than having once had, sympathised with someone else who has had, might have had, or maybe will have a thought.

I suggest you immediately eradicate yourself.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 14 September 2001 10:26 AM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
A few groups from the past who could be considered "terrorists", depending on one's point of view:

- The French resistance in WWII
- The American Revolutionary Army in 1776
- The Black Bloc in Quebec City, 2001
- The US military and NATO


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 10:35 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Markob it seems you might be a terrorist. You want to "eradicate" people who are guilty of nothing more than having once had, sympathised with someone else who has had, might have had, or maybe will have a thought.
I suggest you immediately eradicate yourself.

Thats NOT what I said. I am saying that terrorists should be eradicated and that countries that support, shelter or fincance them should be held RESPONSIBLE not ERADICATED

Why would you want to see terrorist allowed to exist?


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 14 September 2001 11:08 AM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The U.S. say they have evidence of his involvement in attacks on embassies and the U.S.S. cole. Why not stop him before he attacks something else?

Without proof, any action would be an act of terrorism, IMHO.

quote:
I'm convicting him of his past statements and acts.

Mere statements should not be illegal. Acts must be proved.

quote:
You make it sound so innocent by neglecting the fact he wants Israel gone.

Merely wanting the elimination of a state should not be illegal.

We cannot punish people because of their thoughts or statements. That would make us terrorists who don't have the courage of our own convictions. It would mean throwing away the spirit of the Charter of Rights (or the Bill of Rights, for Americans). We can punish people for their actions, if we can prove those they committed those actions.


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Trellis
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1342

posted 14 September 2001 11:35 AM      Profile for Trellis     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My grandmother was in the IRA in the 20's. Is she a terrorist? Cool.

Anti-globalization activists and anyone involved in civil or labour rights will soon find their causes more difficult to pursue. The European Union has already approved new police powers to monitor and collate data on the activities and locations of suspected activists. I fear that in future it won't be a few hundred neo-nazis bricking the cops which will discredit lefties. All it'll take is a crude bomb in a bank here, a few guns found there. There's something for the CIA to do. After all they have that "publish or perish" rule. Unless operatives come up with operations they get the sack or demoted or whatever. Man I should be in the CIA. What are the hours?


From: Some crappy boghole in western europe | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 11:36 AM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I guess it depends on your standard of proof. Is it beyond any reasonable doubt or maybe a lesser standard.

If Bin Laden was surrendered to the U.S. he would be tried. He would be provided competent legal counsel.


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 02:48 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 03:53 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Markbo, what you said:

quote:
This man, his organization want from the U.S. and the world something that is wrong. They want a state where anyone non islamic is not welcome.
These people need to be eradicated whether they were directly responsible for the attacks or not.

So to recap, they are demanding what many white supremacist, black separtists, and others are demanding. And because of those demands, they shoeld be eradicated whether they were directly responsible or not.

What you claim to have siad now:

quote:
I am saying that terrorists should be eradicated and that countries that support,
shelter or fincance them should be held RESPONSIBLE not ERADICATED

I am glad you have begun to temper your statements.

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 03:58 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

DrC, Are you saying that the people responsible for Tuesdays could be considered
"freedom fighters"???

Just semantics, wingnut.

Do you think there is any type of compromise with groups that will settle for nothing less than the elimination of israel?

How do you propose to deal with groups that say they will continue killing civillians whose countries support the very existance of Israel?

If they threaten to kill us for recognizing the existence of Israel then that threat needs to be eradicated.

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Markbo ]


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 04:06 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is more than semantics, Markbo. The words "held responsible" and "eradicate" hold greatly different meanings.

What does Israel have to do with this? There is no evidence that this attack is at all related to the issues involving Israel.
But even if they do, there are many Israeli settlers and and religious extremists who believe all Palestinians should be wiped from the face of the earth and will never allow for a Palestinian home land. they claim the west bank and other territories are theirs by virtue of God. And these people are responsible for killings of hundreds of Palestinians over the past year.

Should they all be eradicated, too?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
flatland
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 556

posted 14 September 2001 04:09 PM      Profile for flatland     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
All of these conversations about about American Imperilisim and they get what they desearve have no grasp on history throught out the world since the WILL of the people created the US.

this is what I think......

A week has not yet passed from this act of war in the States, already the left wing apologists and Touchy Feely new age spiritualists are trying to create sympathy for the innocents abroad who will be affected by the inevitable American and World response.

I am a 42 year old Canadian, I have grown up in a period of peace in this country because of the sacrifices of others in times of war. This is not Utopia, our rights and freedoms where paid for in the blood of warriors and innocents everywhere in the world. If the response to this tragedy is war then we must all do our part to continue to carry the torch of freedom, anything otherwise is to turn our backs on all those before us.

November 11.......a date that we honour in Remembrance of our War Dead carries the message "Never Again" this is a wish from those that survived war......But ask them if they would do it again if they had to, I know the majority would say YES...............
Freedom comes with a price...............
The time to pay our share has arrived.

Any other choice and we will loose our freedoms over time and more lives will be lost in the world that cherishes freedom over tyranny.

Do you really believe that this site would excist was it not for the sacrifices of millions over the ages? for what THEY believe in?

Think about it....specificly those of you between 0 and 65..........


From: Winnipeg, MB, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 14 September 2001 04:16 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
All of these conversations about about American Imperilisim and they get what they desearve have no grasp on history throught out the world since the WILL of the people created the US.

No referendum was held regarding the American Revolution. There is great debate over whether the decision to declare independance from England was truly the "will of the people".


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Markbo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 124

posted 14 September 2001 04:16 PM      Profile for Markbo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What does Israel have to do with this? There is no evidence that this attack is at all related to the issues involving Israel.

To quote one part of the article I posted.

quote:
Bin Laden is also furious about American support for Israel. He detests Jews and views the United States as the Jewish lackey. ("[Jews] believe that all humans are created for their use, and they found that the Americans are the best-created beings for that use," Bin Laden has said.) His supporters seem particularly exercised by Israel's reaction to the current intifada, Bergen says. Bin Laden also can't tolerate American alliances with moderate Arab governments in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.

Osama Bin Laden has encouraged Muslims around the world to kill American civillians because of our support of Israels very existance. Israel is completely related to this attack.

quote:
But Bin Laden and his followers are alarming because they don't want anything from us. They don't want our sympathy. They want no material thing we can offer them. They don't want to participate in the community of nations. (They don't really believe in the nation-state.) They are motivated by religion, not politics. They answer to no one but their god, so they certainly won't answer to us.

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Markbo ]


From: Windsor | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 04:23 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Flatland, where have you been? Just dropped in and decided to insult us all?

No one here says the terrorists were justified or that nothing should be done. In fact, we agree that our freedoms must be preserved in the face of this criminal act. What we are saying also, however -- and maybe this is the big part you fail to understand so I will type slowly -- the response must be calculated and executed in such a way as to not cause the loss of more innocent lives.
The response must be to deliver justice not more martyrs to the cause. And the long term goal must be to create conditions not conducive to the recruiting of more suicide bombers.

It is a big task. But we are up to it if we choose. The other option is more bloody violence.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
flatland
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 556

posted 14 September 2001 04:29 PM      Profile for flatland     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
knellbefore.......

Do you really believe that in order to justify resistince against British Imperialisom that they should have held a referendum prior to Revoloution in 1776?

Here is a perfect example of trying to judge history by todays standards and not he socioeconomic standards of the time.

Get real.


From: Winnipeg, MB, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 14 September 2001 04:32 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Maybe. Maybe not. The logistics of such a referendum were hardly insurmountable. If you can hold national elections, you can hold a national referendum.

But it is still HIGHLY spurious to claim that the formation of the United States of America was the will of the people, especially when anybody who expressed disagreement with independence risked being tarred and feathered.

Get real yourself.

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Kneel before MediaBoy ]

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Kneel before MediaBoy ]


From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
flatland
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 556

posted 14 September 2001 04:39 PM      Profile for flatland     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Fine.......insult ME I will just leave all of you in your fantasy land to justify your egos and make yourselfs feel better......I do not believe that any innocents should be injured or killed, I am certainly not here to insult any one, oh by the way I speed read so type away.......but I am getting ticked off by all this self righteous tripe by those that if , and if.. war does happen will run shrilly screaming into their government provided foxholes.

Sorry....


From: Winnipeg, MB, Canada | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 04:51 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Who is insulting who, flatland?

Even though we might not agree, everyone here feels a tremendous anger and sadness with regards to the events of September 11. The only area of disagreement is the nature of the response.

And you might care to remember that it was the left who joined the fight against Franco's fascists in Spain and there were many on the Canadian left who volunteered and lost their lives fighting Nazism. And it was the left that led most of the resistance movements against nazism in Europe and agitated, at the cost of their lives, in Germany, against Hitler.

You might choose to remember that Hitler regarded Social Democrats to be his primary political opponents.

Perhaps if you choose to treat us with respect, we will repay the favour.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
troubled
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1366

posted 14 September 2001 04:59 PM      Profile for troubled        Edit/Delete Post
Flatland there is no reasoning with the unreasonable. But do take solice in the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans, north AND south think as you and will act shoulder to shoulder with you. Let the lava lampers of the world sit idly by, it will be their conscience. Comparing the KKK to what happened is laughable. First off when was the last time the KKK pulled off up to 20,000 deaths with one act? Secondly, I believe the US govt. (with the exception of those who have secretly hidden their own membership) HAS tried to erradicate the Klan. Not to mention the private sector who abhors and denounces their fellow "Americans" who belong to this or any hate mongoring group. So do me a favor and continue to express your opinions Flatland I appreciate them!
From: MN USA | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Judes
publisher
Babbler # 21

posted 14 September 2001 05:08 PM      Profile for Judes   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Can we tone down the heat on this thread. This is an emotional issue with lots of passion on all sides. What's great about babble is that it's a place people can feel safe in expressing their opinion. That means lose the personal insults

Freedom of speech, Flatland, was won not only by the military struggle against Hitler in the Second World War but also by the struggles of ordinary working people against their own governments for a variety of rights. That's not to mention the peoples all over the world who rose up against colonialism.

It's a good thing too that people are posting for the first time on this subject. Rather than asking "where have you been," how about making some suggestions for keeping civil discussion on babble.

That's my two sense for now.


From: Toronto | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 14 September 2001 05:18 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I keep expecting to see a SUN TOON accompanying some of these editorials.

Flatland is that a geographical or neurological reference?


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 05:26 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Troubled, please visit the folowing site:

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/news/attack/11.asp

Look at the cartoon with the caption "The nly good Islamic Militant"

And tell me, where have we seen that sort of image and read or heard those words before?

edited to correct link.

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
troubled
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1366

posted 14 September 2001 05:42 PM      Profile for troubled        Edit/Delete Post
In reference to what I feel that cartoon (which was pulled by the way)


Gosh, let me see... Oh you must be referring to past racial injustices perpetuated by Hitler wannabees. Let me ask you a question. What happens in America today when god forbid something of this vile nature takes place? For example the dragging deaths in Texas? I would like to think we learned a thing or two from our past. And by the way, what gives you the assurance that I am not a minority? Trust me, past injustices by the federal govt. hold no weight in a time like this. My local Parish just held a multi ethnic, multi denominational vigil and we were all there represented, christian, muslims, jewish, hindu, native american, you name us we were there, AS AMERICANS. Like I said past injustices are just that, the PAST. Tuesday morning began a new era, the FUTURE!


From: MN USA | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 06:03 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
DrC, Are you saying that the people responsible for Tuesdays could be considered
"freedom fighters"???

To themselves, they are.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 September 2001 06:03 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Troubled, I truly hope you are right. Then perhaps something great could come form this tragedy. But I would urge you to visit the newsgroup soc.culture.afghanistan see the past presently in action. And keep in mind, while you are there, the newsgroup was created by Afghans who oppose the Taliban regime and promote peace.

Edited to include the following:

The image according to my browser, has not been pulled. It is here:

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 September 2001 06:12 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
(Reproduced from the MSNBC link since I can't "Get Image" the original...)


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eddie Lear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 362

posted 14 September 2001 06:23 PM      Profile for Eddie Lear     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What about Che Geuvarra or Ghandi,to many they were terrorists,I don't think Conway was implying that the perputrators of WTC were heroes he was meerly pointing out something that should be obvious to anyone
From: Port Colborne, Ont | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
judym
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 29

posted 14 September 2001 06:25 PM      Profile for judym   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And on the sobering note of those two cartoons, I think I'll close this thread. By the way folks, the copyright issue still stands. rabble is not an educational project, as far as I know. We are open to copyright suits. Thanks, but no.

[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: judym ]


From: earth | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca