BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?

Subject: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Peter Woodruff
Date: 07 Jul 05 - 10:34 PM

Dear Mudcatters,
   I'm listening to airamericaradio.com right now. I'm listening to the Mike Malloy Show. As it should be he is talking about London's greatest terrorist attact. This multiple bombing attack on people in the free world? is a coincidence? The reality of this "War on Terror" is said to be contrived. These bombings are not neccesarily that of the obvious. Why was the " Face of 911" New York Mayor Guilliani interviewed in London on the day of the blasts? I heard this earlier on the Randi Rhodes Show with Sam Seder.

Peter Woodruff

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 01:22 AM

Peter - This will be an extremely unpopular thread because of the 'conspiracy' overtones but...

I have to admit to having similar thoughts. What better way to shift the attention of G8 away from global warming or the economics of the developing nations? What better way to cement the relationship between the U.S. and Britain than to bond their citizens in grief and dismay? What better way to increase the demand for a war on terror?

It somehow doesn't fit that this was an act of Muslim fanatics. It just doesn't make any sense from a logistical standpoint. Why would you attack when the leaders of the G8 would be able to sit down and agree on strategies to combat terrorism? I smell something very fishy.

These are random thoughts so please don't accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist. Its just another way of trying to make sense of madness. I know that insanity is an absence of reason so maybe its like Galloway says - its the result of our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. The counter argument is, of course, that 911 happened before the invasion.

So - What is the answer? Do we continue to kill and maim innocent Iraqis so that they can retaliate by killing and maiming innocent Westerners? We have already hurt them more than they have hurt us. When will this end? How will it end?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 01:49 AM

Seems to make sens to interview Guiliani. After all, he was Mayor when New York suffered a horrendous tragedy. One would think London could recover more easily if it learns from New York's mistakes and successes.

But no, I don't buy the idea of a conspiracy by the Western Powers That Be. I don't like the Bush Administration and I don't like the fact that Blair got suckered in by the Bushites, but I don't really see widespread deceit in either administration.

Seems to me that Arab terror is carried out becaus the Arabs feel powerless in the face of the Superpowers, and the only way they can fight back is by terrorism. Terror is a horrendous thing, whoever is responsible for it - but I can't believe it's a conspiracy by Western leaders against their own people. Both governments have too many honest employees who would expose that sort of conspiracy.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 02:06 AM

While I feel strongly about the idiocy of Bush's policies in the promulgation of his deluded faith and its concomitant fanatics, I feel just as strongly about the suicidal idiocy of any Islamist who seeks exaltation through murder and self-destruction. Whether Islamist, CHristian or Taoist the mass murderers of our times should be pulled back from their pushbutton devices and made to retrain childhood training.

The human lust for slaughter, wherever it rises up, is about as ugly as the soul can get, and if anything ever bore the stamp of Evil Incarnate, that's where I would look. I don't much care whether the brand is on the likes of Bush, Delay and Scalia foolishly promoting the wrath of their Old Testament fictions, or whether it is on the face of Osama bin Laden sending boys to hell by promising them heaven. Perversion, whether high, West, East or low is perversion and it is deeply yewgly.

A

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: MBSLynne
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 02:41 AM

Well said Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 02:42 AM

Guilliani happened to be in London and is probably and regrettably, best placed to share the experience of a cowardly, sensless terrorist attack. Although yesterdays 37+ deaths are nothing compared with the 1000 or so from the World Trade Centre, they are still 37 people who lost their lives through no fault of their own, whilst they were carrying out their daily lives. I have no doubt that the press would have interviewed our own Mayor had he not still been in Singapore after the Olympic bid.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 04:10 AM

'Cowardly attack'? If it IS a suicide attack, you can't call them cowardly, unless you change the meaning of the word. Let's not fall into the trap of attributing only vices to our enemies (and by corollary, only virtues to ourselves).

Vicious, murderous, fanatical, destructive of their own cause, yes. Let's make sure they don't win by provoking attacks on good honest British Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 04:13 AM

I completely agree with both Joe and Amos.

Listen, I'm sure this has been said again and again-but do you really think that if all the occupation forces were pulled out of Iraq today, and the Mideast was somehow finally able to come to a peace agreement, (I'll stop with just those two for now) that fanatics would stop hating and stop wanting to seek vengence, if not for the present, but for the past wrongs perpetrated?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that even if it were possible to accede to every one of the demands ever made by any terrorist group out there, I don't think it would stop the violence. The only thing that would most likely happen is that new grievances would be found, and new enemies discovered.

I hate that which is in our species which is capable of such violence, but not to recognize it as something so deeply ingrained that there has hardly been a time in our history where people weren't finding reasons to fight and kill each other would be the height of folly.

-Ellen

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 04:57 AM

I agree with Amos. As to conspiracy there is the testimony of at least two people on the bus who claim they saw the suicide bomber explode before their eyes.
All I would ask is that those who wish to distance themselves from religion and its fanaticisms look seriously at the non-faith of Humanism which seems to put into practice all that is best in the foundations of religions while not believing in the Supernatural nonsenses that lead to faith being the instrument of death and misery.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 05:48 AM

dianavan you are on the wrong medication

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 06:19 AM

It's not really a matter of "acceding to every one of the demands ever made by any terrorist group". The point is that the invasion and occupation of Iraq, a secular state where this kind of fumdamentalist terror did not have a foothold, has provided an opportunity for it to flourish and extend itself - and this was predicted by people who opposed that invasion. It was an example of the way in which the wrong kind of response to terrorism can actually reward terrorism, and assist it.

We might not have been formally "acceding to the demands made by the terrorists", but we were in practice doing what they wanted us to do.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 06:26 AM

I desperately hope there's not a repeat of the 'shoot first-ask q's later' policy of the world powers, i.e. to justify further invasions of sovereign states with accompanying indiscriminate mass murder of the natives.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Doktor Doktor
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 06:32 AM

ummm .. we going to invade Bradford next then ? or Handsworth ?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 08:05 AM

"Love your neighbor as yourself." Jesus

"Do as you will, and harm no one." Wiccan saying

"An eye for an eye, and the whole world goes blind." Mahatma Gandhi

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 08:16 AM

Note that the unscrupulous and ruthless among political and religious leaders will ALWAYS use one act of violence to justify further acts of violence in retaliation...for their own gain...and that those who suffer will mostly be...innocent bystanders.

Consider the history of Ireland and the Middle East in that regard.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jacqui.c
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 09:36 AM

IMHO this comes down to specific types of PEOPLE not races or nations.

There always seem to be thugs of any colour whose aim in life is to foster bad feeling against others. Unfortunately, as we have seen on the 'Cat, one or two bad apples can spoil the whole barrel with negative and aggressive attitudes. When these bad apples get together and have access to weapons the whole situation becomes inflammatory. I don't pretend to understand the mindset of these people.

I would hazard a guess that a good proportion of the world's population would be quite content to live and let live with their neighbours. The problem is that the trouble makers so often can find a persuasive reason for this not to happen - look at the people in the UK and USA who still back the incursion into Iraq, the population of Germany in the 30's.......

I don't think that, given the present state of mankind, we will see any real improvment in the situation in our lifetime. All those of us who want peace can do is to pick up and move on from these kinds of attrocities and try to show, by example, how to live in relative peace with our neighbours.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:14 AM

Well said, jacqui. Darn right most people would be content to live and let live with their neighbours. It's a very small minority of individuals who promote and cause these violent acts...but the media gives them plenty of attention.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:19 AM

Depends which violent acts you mean. One way and another quite a lot of people don't seem to worry too much about violent acts carried out in their name against people they don't see as neighbours. In fact they seem to see them as completely different from violent acts carried out against people they do count as neighbours.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Piers
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:21 AM

Nice One Jacqui. But is it really enough to just passively hope other will follow our good example while other actively promote violence?

I don't think so. I think we have to be active in promoting peace and conditions in which peace can prevail.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:23 AM

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/camplanx.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Pauline L
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:27 AM

Sadly, I must agree with Ellen. The real enemy is hatred.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:28 AM

On 9-10 Condi Rice warned the mayor of San Francisco to not fly to Washingtion on 9-11.

I wonder if anyone was told ahead of time to not take the tube on 7-7.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: JedMarum
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:32 AM

jacqui the Jihadists believe there are two kinds of people too. Muslims (I'm sure they would say proper Muslims) and non-believers. Jihad is the holy war to kill, enslave or convert non-believers.

I do not say this to belittle your point - and of course, I am quite certain that most of the world's Muslims are NOT Jihadists. But unfortunately, the hateful extremists who attempt to speak for all of Islam are.

Make no mistake - the motivation for Jihad has nothing to do with Afghanistan or Iraq, it pre-dates 9/11 and the first Persian Gulf War.

The western world could probably give in now. We could pull our troops home, let Iraq, Saudi, Egypt and the rest fall to the extremists. And we could probably even pay them not kill us very often, for a decade or so. But they'll be back, if they continue to grow in power. You may not be forced to covert - but your children will.

The Western world, for all of its shortcomings, does not deserve Jihad. We cannot change anything in our behavior or philosphies that will stop the Jihadists - short of complete coversion.

Assuming that the significant majority of the Muslim world does not want the fascist, extremists governing their lives either - we certainly can defeat this wave of hate-mongers, and restore a more reason based balance to the region and to the world.

That, I think is the common ground that all of us can support. We can argue about how we get there - but that is certainly the goal of the Bush/Blair other ally approach.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: RobbieWilson
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:37 AM

It is foolish to say that the people who commit such appalling acts are nothing more than mindless thugs, or are some kind of separate species from us good law abiding peaceful people.

After 9/11 the desire for vengance was commonplace in America and even over here in England. The Iraq war was an expression of that vengance, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. How much stronger must that desire be for people whose fathers, brothers, mothers, sisters, have been killed in their own homes, at weddings, in hospitals by military and economic powers which they are unable to challenge in any way other than underhand violence.

Violence creates the desire for more violence until people see that the only long term progress is made through peace. The real counter to the effectveness of the terrorists desire to produce terror and hatred does not lie in retaliatory violence against some scapegoat but in the way ordinary people in London were seen to be helping each other, refusing to be panicked and demonstrating our common humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: JedMarum
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:38 AM

The Islamic extremists believe that Jihad is the central duty of every Muslim.

Obviously all Muslims are NOT Islamic extremists and obviously we(the Western world)MUST be mindful of that fact in our words and deeds. BUT like it or not - Islamic extremists insist on speaking for all Muslims. They have forced their power and influence over much of the third world's Muslim population, where they dictate their will and operate through fear - and they are fighting tooth and nail for those third world countries where they have a foothold. Additionally, they have clearly, loudly and widely published their motivations for Jihad. There is NO doubt that they hate non-believers and see it as their sacred duty to kill or enslave all infidels.

Look at these widely published views on the motivation for Jihad:

Source: http://www.islamreview.com/articles/humanrights.shtml

"Jihad ideology separates humanity into two hostile blocs: the community of Muslims (Dar ul-Islam), and the infidel non-Muslims (Dar ul-Harb). Allah commands the Muslims to conquer the entire world in order to rule it according to Koranic law. Hence Muslims must wage a perpetual war against those infidels who refuse to submit. This is the motivation for jihad."
_____________________

Source Qur'an (Verse of the Sword):
"Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is forgiving, merciful"

Source Qur'an (Sura 9:5): says that "regular worship" and "pay the poor-due" are two primary requirements of every Muslim.

Source: Sahih Bukhari, a most widely known and respected collection Muslim traditions of thoughts of Muhammad attributes to him these words, "Allah assigns for a person who participates in (holy battles) in Allah's Cause and nothing causes him to do so except belief in Allah and in His Messengers, that he will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr)."

Source: Muqaddimah, by Ibn Khaldun (14th Century) another popular source for modern Jihadists says "in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force." In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with "power politics," because Islam is "under obligation to gain power over other nations."
_____________________

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: JedMarum
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:41 AM

agreed Robbie - and others; vengence has absolutely NO place in the Western world's response to this terrorist act ... nor to 9/11 or any other.

clear, well planned and purposeful actions are needed.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: JedMarum
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:50 AM

... also I'm sure that Blair, Bush and the other allies would argue that our countries' recent "War on Terror" actions (military, financial, diplomatic and intelligance) are indeed clear, well planned and purposeful actions.

You or I might argue with that ... and our countries may wish to modify the steps we've taken - but hopefully, these are the basis for those actions.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:54 AM

And you could match every one of those with quotes over the last two thousand years saying very much the same kind of thing, but claiming to speak in the name of Christianity. And with actions done to match.

And you could find people talking and acting like that day. Just stick a couple of terms like "Aryan" and "Christian" together on google and see the kind of thing that crawls out.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: JedMarum
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 12:09 PM

No argument, McGrath. Terrible things have been done in the name of religious ideoligies. That is what we are facing now.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: JedMarum
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 12:11 PM

Oooops - I mean ideologies

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 02:34 PM

Round up all Muslims

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 05:25 PM

AS I said elsewhere... although a previously unknown group calling themselves the Secret Group of Al Qaeda of Jihad (or something like that) claimed they did it, there is no evidence as yet that these bombs were planted either by suicide bombers or by Muslims, or by Jews or by Nazis or by Christians.

Don't jump too soon.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 05:40 PM

It could even have been the BNP.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Ooh-Aah2
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 08:40 PM

People on this thread are correct when they say that violence begets terror, which begets more violence... etc. The IRA was beaten not by British bullets but by courageous people in government gritting their teeth, negotiating with the scum, and removing their spurious emotional excuses for blowing up little boys in supermarkets.

If there is a wave of anti-Muslim violence then the terrorists win. A Muslim man duffed up in the back streets of Bradford will become an instant 'martyr' and his fate be noised abroad in the Islamic loony faction to inspire more lethal attacks. By showing tolerance to the majority of Muslims among us who are not loony terrorists but decent people, we will create a critical mass of people who will slowly direct Islam away from the insane turn it has taken in recent years, and back to the position of comparitive tolerance it held in the Middle Ages, when it was Christians who were the main religious killers. This doesn't mean one has to like Islam - I detest it - but tolerance is not only the morally correct course but the best policy.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 09:31 PM

It somehow doesn't fit that this was an act of Muslim fanatics.

Yeah, just because the Islamic terrorist group that bombed Madrid have claimed credit for bombing London is no reason to assume that this is a work of Islamic terrorists.

No way did the Islamic terrorists do it. Like Dianavan said, it was obviously a G8 conspiracy to shift the focus away from them having to do something about Africa. What better way for Tony Blair to act than bomb his own people and blame it on the Islamic terrorists who are so willing to step up and take the blame.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 09:38 PM

Muslim clerics in Iran are saying that the terrorists are the illegitimate children of Western diplomacy and are not in any way Muslims.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 09:53 PM

Muslim clerics in Iran are saying that the terrorists are the illegitimate children of Western diplomacy and are not in any way Muslims.

I just did a news search and a Google search and could find no record of any Iranian cleric claiming that. DO YOU ACTUALLY MAKE THAT STUFF UP?

TERRORIST MURDERERS ARE ENEMIES OF THE HUMAN RACE. PEOPLE WHO MAKE EXCUSES FOR THEM ARE JUST AS BAD.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 10:16 PM

Google Iranian cleric:

"Has the British prime minister forgotten who Al-Qaeda's parents are?" Ayatollah Kashani asked thousands of worshippers after Friday prayers at Tehran University.

"It's the illegitimate child of America and Israel, but you name it Islam. This savagery is not Islam. It is coming from inside of you and it is now punching you,"

"You created all this to plague us, but now it is plaguing you. You have done that before, by equipping Saddam with weapons to fight us, but now you are bogged down in Iraq, he sad, referring to the U.S. support of Iraq's toppled leader Saddam Hussein during his 1980-1988 war with Iran.

"You have to learn from this and come to your senses," Sheikh Kashani said.

I am not in any way making excuses for those who think they can solve problems with violence. I am, however, questioning foreign policy that breeds terrorists.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:17 PM

I really don't think that this is the time for delving into the causes of the feelings that resulted in the bombings.

Not when there are bodies still trapped 20m underground at Kings Cross.
Not when there are still more than 70 people in hospital, several on the critical list.
Not when the forensic teams are still collecting information.
Not when the terrorists (and those that planned and funded the action) are yet to be conclusively identified.

At this stage, speculation or philosophising about what creates such terrorists may be fun to do, but it is not productive, and it diverts attention form the more immediate tasks - like helping people deal with grief/terror, or getting accurate information from the public to the investigators. Whether one takes Dianavan's view of things, or Hannam's, or for that matter any other view as to the causes, this is simply not the time. The time for that will come, and soon. Just not yet.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: LadyJean
Date: 08 Jul 05 - 11:49 PM

Osama Bin Laden
With Appologies to Leigh Hunt
(Readers under 45 won't get the joke. Readers over 45 already know the last line.)

Osama bin Laden May his tribe decrease
Came home one night from disturbing the peace.
And in his tent was amazed to see
An angel writing on a gold PC.
Great, said Osama, looking awed,
Are you listing the names of those who love God?
Nope, said the angel, this database
lists everyone who spits in God's face.
Good! said Osama, list away.
But you'll have to list the whole U.S.A.
With their Baywatch babes and their rock and roll
Theirs is a nation without any soul.
Said the angel, Osama, take a hint.
Consider as I save and print,
the things you do in Allah's name.
Osama was never quite the same.
For on that printout, as I'm sure you've guessed.
LO BIN LADEN'S NAME LED ALL THE REST*

*It goes without saying that Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson tied for second place.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Jul 05 - 12:00 AM

You're right El Greko. I just heard that there were still people unaccounted for. I would like to emphasize that I am horrified by what has happened. I was just thinking out loud which is not the best thing to do when people are grieving.

I think, however, that this thread (considering the original post) opened up the topic of terrorism in general. I don't think it was meant to be a memorial or part of the grieving process.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 09 Jul 05 - 12:22 AM

Is it true that the bombings occurred in predominately Muslim neighborhoods?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 09 Jul 05 - 12:55 AM

I don't know about the neighbourhoods being predominantly Muslim, there are more offices than residences there, I think, as the locations are in the City centre; but certainly a number of Muslims live and travel through them. There is an Arab cafe at King's Cross for example, where some of the victims received first aid, and all the customers helped out. The racial/religious distribution among the victims is not known, but judging from the pictured of victims that I have seen there is a big representation not only of Muslims, but also Hindus and Buddhists, as well as Christians of various denominations. London has a very multicultural community, and this seems to be reflected amongst the victims.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 09 Jul 05 - 04:53 AM

The train bombs were, without exception, detonated when the trains were in the tunnels, and at least two when there were other trains passing, in order to cause the greatest amount of disruption. Initial reports suggested that the bus bomb might have been on its way to a tube station but either it detonated early or the bomber was delayed. The neighbourhoods affected are about 80% offices with probably 5% of actual residents, except Woburn Place where my friend George lives, it's probably about 60% offices and 40% very mixed residential. Racial distribution means nothing, the 'population' is wholly human.

Kings Cross is a major junction. An underground train going towards Kings Cross is, at that time of the morning, jam packed solid with people. Liverpool Street is also a major junction. That too, has a vast number of people going through it at that time of the morning. Aldgate is almost entirely offices but they are mostly financial establishments... imagine the chaos on the Stock Market if they were destroyed....! Again, it is a major junction and trains travelling through it are often packed. I cannot comment on Edgware Road as I don't travel through it very often. Woburn Place is a Square that has a higher proportion of residences, mainly flats and appartments above offices. Although the blast was enough to take the roof off the bus, it was sufficiently far enough away that there was little damage do buildings. George says his windows rattled but that was all. It seems that a lot of the blast impact was absorbed by the trees in the square.

The bombs detonated in an area where there IS NO PARTICULAR RACIAL OR RELIGIOUS PREDOMINENCE. They were detonated where there were people.

The initial question was 'why was Guilliano interviewed about London?' That question has been well and truly answered, neighbourhoods, races, colours and creeds were not mentioned.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 09 Jul 05 - 06:08 PM

A thought re: Jed Marum's note about "...agreeing or disagreeing with Bush/Blair and Iraq".

It does seem that the Iraq invasion was long planned with cover-up reasons for so doing and not a retaliation for 9/11---that was Afghanistan.   Now the spin is that we are spreading "democracy".

The NY Times has a wonderful op-ed piece today regarding the "spreading of democracy"---Jefferson, it was stated, wanted it to spread but knew that one cannot force these things. One size does not fit all and we cannot create everyone in our allegedly wonderful image.   

That said, neither can the "jihadists" re-create everyone in their mold. That is the sad fact of human nature---everyone keeps trying instead of looking for a benefit for all humankind.

Someone made a comment to me recently with which I totally agree---Man created God and not the other way around===and so many have created their own version---and theirs is, of course always the correct version.

My own guess is that everything goes back to economics, power, and control ---keep it and do it in the name of the deity you have created.

"Democracy" has 9 letters---"power" only 5---and"oil" the shortest of all w/ 3.   Little by little I am sure the administration will get down to the shorter words about the war---they have always been better with short words. Frankly, this makes the Gulf of Tonkin incident seem like only a small little old fib.

A bit off topic about the London tragedy---but so much tragedy is being unleashed for all the wrong reasons---mother nature can cause enough with weather and such. Humankind surely does not need to help in the effort.


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 09:34 AM

I remind you that on 9-11 there was an air force anti terrorist training exercise that was occuring as the actual hijacked planes were in the air. The 9-11 commission found that this caused great confusion in supposedly being able to respond effectively since the "this is not a drill" announcement was 1 our and 45 minutes too late.

Well take a look at the coincidental circumstances in London.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/090705bombingexercises.htm

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 10:28 AM

Tracing the internet claim of al quada respondsibility of the London Bombs... It came from Maryland http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/alqmaryland.html

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 10:30 AM

Interesting... he says there was an excercise at 9.30am and that this happened at the same time. He's 40 minutes late then, because the first explosion was at 8.50am and the BBC had the first report about 30 mins after that. In another post elsewhere, a teacher states that their class was due to set off at 9.30 to use the Underground but were turned back. This might throw light on the 'friend's husband' who was told to take their passport in to work on the Underground for identification though.....

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 12:19 PM

"The IRA was beaten not by British bullets but by courageous people in government gritting their teeth, negotiating with the scum ..."

So let's begin the negotiations with these Islamofacists, and in 150 years or so, maybe they'll stop killing us.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 02:34 PM

I really do believe that 'religion' is a red herring. This, and other acts of 'terror' in Afghanistan, Iraq, Rwanda, Northern Ireland, Bosnia etc., etc. are really about power and profit - religion is just an excuse. Personally, I am 'praying'for our, overwhelmingly, innocent, Muslim brothers and sisters at the moment (although I am not convinced that there is a God to listen to my prayers!).
I certainly don't rule out conspiracy theories. The city in which I live suffered a 'terrorist' attack a few years back. The area that got zapped just happened to be a bit run down and a few developers got very rich re-building it - they never caught the terrorists - funny that !

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 05:07 PM

best way to deal with terorist is to ignore them except to kill them when the chance avails[i know it sounds cold but it is sorta like a spoiled child looking for att.if they know they can get to you they will continualy carry on,if they learn that the only att it gets is there be slapped they will learn better(maybe).

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 05:22 PM

Doesn't look like that method is working very well, jpk. Maybe it's time to try a new approach.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 05:44 PM

Columnnist Gary Young used a thought provoking analogy in his comment piece in today's Guardian:

To say that terrorists would have targeted us even if we hadn't gone into Iraq is a bit like a smoker justifying their habit by saying, "I could get run over crossing the street tomorrow." True, but the certain health risks of cigarettes are more akin to playing chicken on a four-lane highway. They have the effect of bringing that fatal, fateful day much closer than it might otherwise be.

And earlier in the same piece he draws an even more powerful parallel:

We know what took place. A group of people, with no regard for law, order or our way of life, came to our city and trashed it. With scant regard for human life or political consequences, employing violence as their sole instrument of persuasion, they slaughtered innocent people indiscriminately. They left us feeling unified in our pain and resolute in our convictions, effectively creating a community where one previously did not exist. With the killers probably still at large there is no civil liberty so vital that some would not surrender it in pursuit of them and no punishment too harsh that some might not sanction if we found them.

The trouble is there is nothing in the last paragraph that could not just as easily be said from Falluja as it could from London....

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:04 PM

So -Carol C. what is your suggestion---we sure have not really killed many and I do believe that we are running out of cheeks to turn---both on the top of the body and the bottom.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:10 PM

We certainly haven't been turning any cheeks, Bill H, and we've killed many, many more of them than they've killed of us.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:10 PM

...and for every one we kill, we create a dozen more.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:13 PM

we sure have not really killed many

Not killed too many terrorists, true enough - though with successful suicide bombers there is a practical problem involved. Co-religionists, we've killed an awful lot of them, even if we haven't been counting the bodies.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:35 PM

Thank you McGrath---"Terrorists" is what I meant---now that all my, and all our communal, cheeks are gone. If many of these co-religionists would truly step forward we would be moving in the right( I mean correct---"right" is not that clean a word now) direction---and that includes the evangalical crazies who are sure they are also right. Or as Dylan said--not that I am crazy about him---"--God On Their Side".

Bottom line is, as usual, people in power/control/oil/dollars. The fanatics on both sides don't realize that the power people really control things---our involvement in Iraq is a perfect example of that. The Karl Rove cover-up is another. He who leaks the news is their hero and she who defends freedom is in jail.

Bit of drift there=-=sorry.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:41 PM

If your definition of "terrorist" includes those, like the US government, who use state sponsored terrorism, then I don't understand your original question addressed to me, Bill H.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:44 PM

BTW, McGrath, you need to learn that the "terrorists" are whomever GW Bush says they are.   Any "terrorist" who hasn't yet committed a terrorist act is just a future terrorist who needs to be killed before he or she has a chance to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:48 PM

You really missed your calling---you should have been a negligence attorney and parsed words. Did you give Bill Clinton the great idea for asking for the definition of "is".

We could go into the horrors that abound in this world---ours (except Nam--and that had to do with the French) seem more defensive after WW2. In addition, I daresay, much has to do with poverty worldwide and the envy of a better standard of living in Western nations (not just U S).

Don't get me wrong--I think that this administration has mislead the world, us, and Tony Blair (for whatever reason he went along boggles the mind)---but in the bigger picture ---the historical one we do come off a bit better than you---who, by the way, seem to enjoy this way of life----would have us believe.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:52 PM

jpk - "i know it sounds cold but it is sorta like a spoiled child looking for att.if they know they can get to you they will continualy carry on,if they learn that the only att it gets is there be slapped they will learn better..."

Doesn't work too well. The only thing the kid learns is to slap if you don't like something or that its O.K. to slap if you are in a power position. Trouble is - when they go to school and engage in attention seeking behaviours and the only limit is a slap, what does the teacher do? If you slap, they learn to slap.

Same thing applies to this war and all wars.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:54 PM

I notice you always resort to insulting me when the discussion doesn't go your way, Bill H. That's a sign of weak debating tactics.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 06:57 PM

And I still have no idea what your question was about, nor what point you are trying to make.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 07:09 PM

Bill H. - Everyone wants a better standard of living but they do not, necessarily, want to become "Americans" to do that. Most people would rather preserve their culture their religion and their homeland and be given education and opportunity within the context of their own society.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 07:23 PM

"Teflon Tony" Blair has again managed to make political capital from seeming disaster.
Today in parliament he attempted to justify his discredited stance on Iraq by using last weeks bombings.
He peddled his platitudes to a hushed House of Commons, maintaining that these bombings were proof that "We must hunt down the terrorists abroad to keep our people safe".

The only two MPs to speak against Blair, were George Galloway and to a lesser extent, Alex Salmon, the Scottish Nationalist leader.
What a bunch of sycophants and cowards, so afraid of media censure as to betray their principles, when they should have been spitting blood and calling for the heads of those who have brought the UK to this pass.

In my opinion it will be found that those bombings have been carried out by British citizens,and to a large extent,in response to UK support for the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Those of us who voiced our protest to the Iraq war on these pages, cited the threat of terrorism as one of the main points against taking part and now another of our prophecies have come about.

Latest leaked documents suggest that both Britain and America are about to cut and run from Iraq, just as the Americans did from Vietnam, and the same endgame is in prospect for those who were forced by financial hardship to support the invaders....The butchers knife.

Maybe some day we'll learn to think again before attempting to export our economic and social systems to other cultures, to pave the way for future invasion and piracy...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 07:49 PM

Ok. I think I'm beginning to catch your drift a little bit.

In addition, I daresay, much has to do with poverty worldwide and the envy of a better standard of living in Western nations (not just U S).

Poverty is probably a big part of it. But the resentment doesn't come from envy. It comes from people wanting powerful countries like the US to stop exploiting their countries and stealing their resources, and killing their civilians in the process.

Yes I do enjoy the standard of living that is possible in the US. I live quite frugally by most US standards, but I am very blessed by world standards. I would like the less fortunate people in the world to be able to enjoy what I am able to enjoy. But this will never happen as long as the stronger and more powerful countries prey upon the weaker countries. And as long as the this continues to be the state of affairs, "terrorism" will never go away. It will only continue to increase.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: skarpi
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 08:06 PM

H-alló all , i am -can´t sleep at the moment but where are we going ?
Why do we have this anger for each other and hate ?
Do they want something that we have ? Or do we seek to get something that they have ? Who are they ? Who are we ?what have we become?
a monsters??? or have we been that all this time ??

For many hundred years the humans have been killing each other ,the
vikings going around and killing , christian
killing jews, araps killing christian serbian killing islam people
in serbia and not far from us only few years back, what do we learn over theese years ?? Nothing nothing at all, yes there is one thing
that we learn and that is how make better weapons to kill and blow up people.

It´s coming into our back , What ever we do to these people they do it back.Do we seek for their Oil ?? I wonder ??

Maybe the Icelanders should start making their own energie the Hydrogen
and start selling it , then what will happen ??


When are we gonna learn from all this ???
Well i leave this .................   
to the special lists, there are enough of them out there .


Well what ever i was just wandering so just ignore everything I wrote

I believe that every person on earth have somthing good in their heart, I have learned that on short time on this earth and I will
do so..........in the future... with lots good thoughts
to all of you ,,,,,,,,
P.s I wrote alot of other stuff witch I wiped out ???
some things are better be off to be not written.

May god be with you All the best Skarpi Iceland

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Alba
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 08:57 PM

Þakka þú fyrir orðatiltæki hvaða þú did. Friður til þú og þinn Skarpi.
(I hope I have said this correctly)

Love and Light
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 11 Jul 05 - 10:24 PM

Well, Carol C., from your last post I am happy that we are in agreement on some things. I just don't have the harsh vies of the US---except for the current administration---that you do.

I also agree with the other writer---things do not have to be in our image. See my first posting re: the article in the Op Ed in NY Times a few days back now relating to the Jeffersonian view on that subject.

That said, one must respond when one is threatened. I don't want to nit-pick definitions here---let us just call it self-defense. Please do not get into the Iraq business since that is a quagmire of our own doing---Afghanistan is not. Saudi Arabia should be.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 04:57 PM

dear carol c if not for the media,this would not even be a blip on the radar.the only way they can accomp.anything with these actions is with media help and there tend. to [blow]things way out of proportion.(more of there [if it bleeds it leads]reporting standards.   giving into the plo,and it's sister orgs sure accomp. a lot did it not[yep more violence]and to think clinton and those before him [bush sr included][yes and carter to] were proud of there placating actions to the spoiled brats of socalled palistine   i do feel for the victims,but must carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 05:17 PM

ya know the other sad thing about this whole ordeal,is going to be the number of lawyers crawling out of the wood works looking to make a fast buck,plus the number of "book"deals that will pop up.    ps carolc,you want better insight into the moslim world,just ask the dutch.[i talked to a friend of mine(one of the few)in norway that i met in the late 70s while in the service,he told me that they are getting really feedup with "them"]. have a great day anyway

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 05:20 PM

Spoiled brats of Palestine?

jpk, there is clearly quite a lot that you don't know about the situation in Israel and the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.'

The first thing you probably don't know is that there have been several hundred Israelis killed since the beginning of the second intifada, while the number of Palestinians killed numbers in the several thousands (a very large number of them children). The Palestinians in these locations are under military occupation by the government of Israel, and they have no legal rights and no human rights whatever. Their lives are completely subject to the whims of the government of Israel and the Israeli Defense Forces.

The second thing you probably don't know is that as we speak, the Palestinians in these locations (as well as some other locations) are having their homes bulldozed right out from under them so that Israel can take all of the rest of the land that they (the Palestinians) and their ancestors have been living on and farming for more than a thousand years (with the possible exception of Gaza).

I condemn the killing of innocents on both sides. But to call the reactions of some Palestinians to these human rights violations and this outright theft and politicide by the government of Israel, "spoiled brats", is either one of the most profoundly ignorant things I've ever heard, or it is one of the most hateful and bigoted things I've ever heard.

I would be willing to bet you a lot of money, that if the government of Israel was doing to you what it is and has been doing to the Palestinians, you would defend your people and your land. Quite likely with the use of violence.

The only way to end the violence in Israel and the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem is to end the occupation of these locations by the government of Israel and let the Palestinians live their lives in freedom, in their own independent state.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 05:28 PM

By the way, jpk... nobody EVER gave in to the Palestinians. Not EVER. The Palestinians are the ONLY ones who have EVER made ANY concessions.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 05:29 PM

lets see,a little bit of country wisdom,if poppa dog an mommy dog got's raybies and puppy do to,put down mom an pop do not make pups prob go a way, sorry but true---life ain't fair, an never will be,
   wish i/we could change the way of the beast,we can't--can only keep tring. hagd

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 05:30 PM

yea right ask yasser.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 05:41 PM

Little bit of country wisdom, jpk...

If yer standing on someone's neck with your barn cleaning boots, and he keeps stabing you in the leg to try to get you off his neck...

GET YER BIG OLD BARN CLEANING BOOT OFF HIS NECK AND LEAVE HIM ALONE

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 06:20 PM

Or--possibly---shoot the critter because maybe your boot was on his neck for a reason.   Hmmmm---food (Kosher) for thought.

I wonder, Carol, why every discussion---this started as London 9/11 gets beamed up from you''like "Scotty"--into an Israeli/Palestinian thing. Let me see---I have the OED in front me --shall look up compulsive and obsessive.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 09:22 PM

I'm not the one who brought up the Palestinians, Bill, though it doesn't surprise me in the least that you think I did. Actually, I almost never am the one who brings up the subject of Israel/Palestine. But I'm one of the few who isn't afraid to talk openly and honestly about it once someone else has brought it up, and to confront the many blatant falsehoods that are commonly repeated about that subject. And that's why you see my name in many of the discussions on the subject.

Or--possibly---shoot the critter because maybe your boot was on his neck for a reason.

Well, if you don't regard the Palestinians as actual people you might use the word critter. But if you are talking about human beings, as I am, you might want to consider why people would be wanting to defend their homes and their loved ones. Maybe because they have every right to do that. So if your foot is on their neck because you want to steal their land and livelihood, and they aren't too happy about you wanting to do that and they try to defend themselves, their property, and their loved ones, maybe you'd better keep your foot there.

If you do, though, don't be surprised if they keep stabbing you in the leg.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 09:28 PM

And of course, the option of shooting them has been tried many, many times. That approach doesn't seem to be working too well either. But I am also not at all surprised to see that you approve of killing people for the purpose of stealing their property.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 09:43 PM

The face of 9-11 in London falls nicely into place for the renewal of the Patriot Act.

The only things that are missing from the Patriot Act this time around are the sunset clauses. In other words: when/if the Patriot Act is "renewed" this week it will be FOREVER !!!!!!!!


http://www.angelfire.com/md2/customviolins/patact3.jpg

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 10:03 PM

jpk - Its comments like this, "you want better insight into the moslim world,just ask the dutch.[i talked to a friend of mine(one of the few)in norway that i met in the late 70s while in the service,he told me that they are getting really feedup with "them"]...

that expose your ignorance. How can you base your opinions on the heresay of just one of the Dutch. Don't you think that it is just one opinion? You make it sound as if all of the Dutch are fed up with Muslims and that all Muslims are terrorists.

Carol C. is right about the Palestinians. They have been denied a homeland by the establishment of Israel. Where are you from? Maybe we should take your homeland and give it to the poor Sudanese from Darfur.

Try to wrap your head around the fact that terrorists come in all shapes and sizes. A terrorist is a terrorist. When other criminals are arrested, we do not identify their religion. Why do you assume that all Muslims are responsible for the actions of a few?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 11:06 PM

Just to clarify though... I am not now, and never have been suggesting that the part of Israel that lies within the Green Line should be taken from the Israelis. I am saying that the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem should end, and the Palestinians who live in those places should be left alone by Israel to establish their own state in peace and freedom.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Manitas_at_home
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:46 AM

I seem to rememder reading somewhere that a lot of Palestine was taken over by Jordan. Perhaps a homeland could be established there?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:53 AM

The land that Jordan took was later captured and occupied by Israel in the 1967 war. This is the land that is now in dispute, and that the Palestinians want as their homeland.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:54 AM

This land, btw, is the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 02:50 AM

Jordan has massive tits

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 03:38 AM

This thread has drifted so far off course, that the last comment by GUEST actually brought it closer to its origins...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:01 PM

Carol C. is right about the Palestinians. They have been denied a homeland by the establishment of Israel. Where are you from?

Dianavan is obviously ignornt of modern Middle Eastern history to make a statement like that.

At the time of the establishment of the State of Israel, the Palestinians rejected a state of their own. From 1948 until 1967 the West Bank and East Jerusalem were part of Jordan and Gaza was part of Egypt. They could have created a Palestinian state at any time during those years but there was absolutely no interest in the establishment of a Palestinian state. Instead the Palestinians waited for the Arabs to drive the Jews into the sea.

After the 1973 war, Anwar Sadat of Egypt realized that driving the Jews into the sea wasn't going to happen and Egypt concluded a peace treaty with Israel. Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt and wanted to give back Gaza. However, Egypt decided the Palestinians in Gaza weren't worth the trouble and wouldn't take Gaza back.

Years later, Jordan also concluded a peace treaty with Israel. By then, had also long ago decided the Palestinians in the West Bank were too much trouble and had no interest in taking back the West Bank.

For many years there has been a general consensus in Israel that a Palestinian state is inevitable. What the Palestinians need is leadership that will stop the terrorism. When that happens, the Palestinian state will be created in very short order.

Blaming Israel for the fact that there is not yet a Palestinian state is the province of either ignorance or anti-Semitism.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:09 PM

The first thing you probably don't know is that there have been several hundred Israelis killed since the beginning of the second intifada.

CarolC seeks to minimize the number of Israelis killed by Palestinian terrorists. If you take the number Israelis killed since the beginning of the second Intifada as a proportion of the population, it is the equivalent of 11 9/11 attacks or as if 33,000 had been killed that day.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:22 PM

GUEST is incorrect on all fronts.

The Palestinians have been trying to get a homeland of their own since before the 1948 war. They have never stopped trying to get their own state. They have been thwarted in their objectives by both Israel as well as Jordan. But it has been their dream and their ambition all along.

To say that the Palestinians could have created a state at any time is simply a lie. Neither Jordan nor Egypt had any intention of letting them do that. But at least Jordan and Egypt didn't run them out of their homes and off their land. And they didn't bulldoze their olive groves. In that respect, the Palestinians did not have quite as much incentive to resist the Jordanians and the Egyptians as they do the Israelis.

CarolC seeks to minimize the number of Israelis killed by Palestinian terrorists. If you take the number Israelis killed since the beginning of the second Intifada as a proportion of the population, it is the equivalent of 11 9/11 attacks or as if 33,000 had been killed that day.

You, GUEST, are seeking to minimize the number of Palestinians killed by Israelis. There have been thousands of Palestinians killed. More than three for every Israeli killed. I don't know the ratio of Palestinians to Israelis overall, but if we use your equation, the number of Palestinians killed by Israelis would be equal to or greater than 33 9/11 attacks, or as if 99,000 or more Palestinians had been killed that day.

Perhaps you seek to minimize these numbers because like Bill H, you do not regard Palestinians as human beings.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Alba
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:28 PM

Are there figures available regarding the number of Palestinians that have been killed over the Years Guest: 01:09 PM or could you direct me to resource that would help me to find out.
Thanks in advance
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:32 PM

For many years there has been a general consensus in Israel that a Palestinian state is inevitable. What the Palestinians need is leadership that will stop the terrorism. When that happens, the Palestinian state will be created in very short order.

This is simply laughable. The Palestinian leadership should not be under any obligation to provide security for the people who are occupying their land. What Israelis need is leadership who will end the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. When that happens, Palestinian terrorism against Israel will be eliminated in very short order.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 01:36 PM

Here you go, Alba...

B'tselem

B'tselem statistics page

Note that this is a website owned and maintained by Israeli Jews.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Alba
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:08 PM

Thanks Carol.
Appreciated.
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:18 PM

just give the muslim/arab world what the openly say they want[the destrution of the jews and to wipe them from this earth]and see if that leads to peace,or maybe to there next openly spoke of target,everyone else who not muslim,after that they will be reduced to fighting with each other,as they are still doing,and have been doing for centuries,even before muslimnism came into being.
have a great day anyway

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:18 PM

Thread Drift---hell, what happened in London (as far as this discussion is concerned) is about as far removed from --in these great minds-- as the Blitz is in the many years that have gone by.

To get back on the track---the Jordan/ Egypt/ 1948/ etc' has been talked to death here already---Israel is a legitimate state. Period. They defended the land that was going to be taken from them by their Arab neighbors--who have no use for their own brethren.

But, the Brits. They surely have handled their situation w/ great restraint and come to some quick conclusions without jumping at them as we did in Oklahoma City, for one. Their press, known for banner tabloid headlines,has been the image of restraint and objectivity. More that our own press, I must say.

The balancing act of freedom and security is a tough one. Let us hope that they and we can come to a good balance so that our way of life is not impacted by those who--for whatever twisted reasons--would destroy it. It will, surely, take a fair-minded administration on both sides of the pond to come up with such a balance. Here it is not balancing too well by leader(s) who state that they have never made any mistakes.   Such surety---please.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:23 PM

Israel is a legitimate state. Period. They defended the land that was going to be taken from them by their Arab neighbors--who have no use for their own brethren.

Nobody in this discussion is saying Israel is not a legitimate state. But they did far more than defend the land they had originally been given. They also stole quite a lot of land that had been given to others, and now they are in the process of stealing from the Palestinians the West Bank, (possibly) Gaza, and East Jerusalem.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:25 PM

here here for blair and sticking with the subject at the g8 and not being sidetracked by headlining.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:27 PM

jpk, there may be some extremist Muslims who are calling for what you have said, but the vast majority of them just want to be left alone to live their lives in peace.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:33 PM

then quit picking on americans
also what's most 'funny'about the jewish state,a rel.

state supported by a country that supposedly hates rel. in govt.   

but then those that hate the most are rel.govt.controlled states

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:34 PM

Additional thought for jpk...

Considering the way you think it's ok to hold all Muslims accountable for the actions and words of a very small percentage of them, I think it would be perfectly reasonable for people to hold you personally responsible for every reprehensible thing that has ever been done by White Christians of European ancestry, and also for every reprehensible thing that has ever been done by men.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:38 PM

I'm not picking on Americans, jpk. I am an American, and I am doing my duty as an American citizen to take responsibility for the bad things my country has done and is doing, and I'm doing my best to try to help correct these things. It's your responsibility as an American citizen to do this as well.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 05:40 PM

Etnic cleansing and clumsey attempts to manipulate the religious and ethnic content of the state lies at the root of the tragedy of Israel/Palestine.If the refugees from the war of 1948 had been allowed to return home the end of the fighting the population of Israel would be much more evenly balanced between Jews and Muslime and Christians, and it is likely that it would now be living peacefully alongside a separate Palestinian state in partnership with it, and in friendship with neighbouring countries.

As I understand it, that kind of situation is what was envisaged by the   founders of Zionism.

...............
Perhaps it's a pity that this thread has been so radically diverted from the London bombings - but it has and it'd make more sense for anyone with stuff to say about that to do so in the other thread about the bombings, rather than struggle vainly to bring this one back in line again..

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 07:12 PM

Perhaps this threat can stay on target and not be hijacked by the franatics and obsessive who can only focus on Israel/Palestinian problems---and they are problems. I add---to add fuel to Carol's fire--of the Palestinian's (and the Saudis, Syrians, etc;) own making.

That should, however, be a different topic---this is about the tragic events in London created---it seems --by some home grown fanatics who felt an embrace---wrongfully believed---to Islam makes this proper. I am sure that true believers will disavow their acts, motives, and intentions.   

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 07:40 PM

"That should, however, be a different topic" - so
so why "add fuel to Carol's fire" by making an intentionally coat-trailing remark?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 07:54 PM

Bill H, I will continue to address factually incorrect assertions such as jpk's, as well as outright falshoods coming from you, on this subject as well as others when I see them.

I will not bring up the subject of Israel/Palestine myself unless there is an extremely compelling reason for me to do so.

The obsession is not mine, but that of people like you who hate all Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims, and/or who see them as less than human, and who just can't pass up an opportunity to spread hate toward these peoples.

It is my responsibility as a person of conscience to point out such behavior when I encounter it, and to combat all forms of hatred wherever and whenever I encounter them. This is what I do, and will continue to do... whether you like it or not.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:17 PM

Now Carol you have made assumptions that are not valid. You don't know me=-==and, happily, I don't know you.   As they said in the show "Odd Couple"---don'e assume it merely make and ASS of U and ME.

Please do not attempt to know what my leanings and feelings are about. Your are not privy to them. Unlike you there are gray areas ---I do not just see black and white as you seem (note---seem) to.

So--bottom line---stick to your your obsessions, your diatribes that you consider arguments, your penchant for personalizing all things, and focusing on one subject---who knows why. BUT---do not presume to know or understand my or other poster's beliefs, politics, or anything about them. You are, frankly, not that smart.

I know you will say this is defensive---no just factual and objective.

Shalom, Salaam, Cheerio, See Ya, etc; So--you still do not know what I am about---so do not ASSume.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:26 PM

Bill H, you have just requested that I stop doing something that you then when right ahead and did to me in the next paragraph. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If you don't want me to tell you what is in your heart and in your mind... don't tell me what is in my heart and mind. Until you live up to the expectations you have of me, don't expect me to do so either.

All I want to do is discuss the issues. But you are so threatened by what I have to say on the issues, you keep making it personal and making personal ad hominem attacks on me.

If you want me to stick to the issues and not discuss you, you'll need to stick to the issues and not discuss me. Stop being such a hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:39 PM

Trouble is, people want to discuss the issues they want to discuss. And so this thread has strayed from its original title and presumably also from its intent.

Which is why yesterday's GUEST comment on Jordan's being well endowed (referring of course to British model or whatever she is) was the closest to the thread's title; because of the British reference.

For the rest, much of this thread reads boringly similar to dozens of other threads on the subject of muslims, jews, bigotry, Bush, Blair, the media etc etc. Many valid opinions are lost in the midst of posters trying to outdo each other and score points off each other.

It's just a rehash and leads nowhere.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:46 PM

El Grecko---You have hit the nail on the proverbial head. This is, sadly, a version of cyber Bullshit---people just venting their own issues---me---I too am guilty in responding to people like Carol
The rest would just be confrontational---so why bother.

Peace!!!

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 08:57 PM

You're so full of it, Bill. I REPEAT... I DID NOT BRING UP THE SUBJECT OF ISRAEL/PALESTINE ON THIS THREAD.

I repeat once again...

I DID NOT BRING UP THE SUBJECT OF ISRAEL/PALESTINE IN THIS THREAD

I have only responded to what others have said on the subject here in this thread.

ANY SUGGESTIONS TO THE CONTRARY BY BILL HAHN IN THIS THREAD ARE OUTRIGHT LIES

Bill Hahn has nothing of substance to contribute to any subject, pertinent or otherwise, so he has to resort to lies and personal attacks because that's all he's got to work with.

El Grecko, if you are suggesting that I am the one who brought the subject of Israel/Palestine into this thread, you are a liar as well.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:14 PM

Wow---you do get upset, Carol. Try to find more to your life than this sad cyber venue. There must be something.    Surely you must have other interests than mundane discussions that lead nowhere.

Have you tried some physical exercises--seriously---get those endorphins flowing--really helps. I played tennis today and this is not my biggest priority. Feel real good---wish you do too. Seriously!! Now we really have left London and gotten into dear old Carol Cs anger.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:15 PM

I rest my case.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:23 PM

which is what? YOur need for anger control management?

Bill H

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:23 PM

From: jpk
Date: 12 Jul 05 - 04:57 PM

dear carol c if not for the media,this would not even be a blip on the radar.the only way they can accomp.anything with these actions is with media help and there tend. to [blow]things way out of proportion.(more of there [if it bleeds it leads]reporting standards.   giving into the plo,and it's sister orgs sure accomp. a lot did it not[yep more violence]and to think clinton and those before him [bush sr included][yes and carter to] were proud of there placating actions to the spoiled brats of socalled palistine   i do feel for the victims,but must carry on.

This is the post that brought the Palestinian People into this Thread.

A simple read through can provide validation of someone's claim that they did not bring the subject up and only replied to the subject when it was!

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:40 PM

which is what? YOur need for anger control management?

No, the fact that you have nothing of substance to add to any discussion. But I am also beginning to conclude that you are a troll.


By the way EL GREKO... the actual subject of this thread is Peter Woodruff's suggestion that the London bombings and the 9/11 attacks were both a part of a conspiracy by the governments of the US and Britain to create an excuse for the "war on terror".

With that in mind, all but the first few posts on this thread are off topic. Yours included.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jul 05 - 09:55 PM

Thanks, GUEST 13 Jul 05 - 09:23 PM

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 04:38 AM

CarolC, calm down - my post was not referring to yours, just to the state of the thread. It's like watching a tennis match with several participants; heads go left, right, further left, and so on, and one cannot get a sense of the whole discussion. The thread started with the question about why Guliani was in London to be interviewed (apparently he was on holiday - true or false, who knows), but the discussion soon descended to bickering.

Now, I did not attack you, but you felt the need to lash out, even to the level of pointing out that my own note too was off the point (!). I don't mind, I still often agree with your postings, though not always with their manner or tone, but hey - it's a free internet, one can say what they want anyway, and we don't have to like each other.

I am only guessing from your manner, but you must be a frustrating person to like when you hit out at friends like this.

Over and out - the other thread on London is more interesting.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 09:23 AM

The land that Jordan took was later captured and occupied by Israel in the 1967 war. This is the land that is now in dispute, and that the Palestinians want as their homeland. This land, btw, is the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. (Carol)
Gaza?

Back to the start of the thread. When the first news came in I knew that there would be people (mostly the same) at Mudcat saying 'conspiracy'. They always do when the actual culprits don't fit into their prejudices. Meanwhile it is obvious except to the most closed-minded that it was an Al Qaeda attack (though this is now probably more a general brand name than an actual strongly led group. The name is there for grabs for any Muslim fundamentalist groups prone to violent action).

What drives these people is much more fundamental than Iraq, Afghanistan or Israel. This type of violence would not stop if some demands were met. Meeting some demands only could help to dissuade some of their new blood.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 12:42 PM

Actually, El Greko, I have been ignoring many of your similar, broad sweeping condemnations of large numbers of other peoples' posts in other threads. I find them to be rude as well as presumptuous. But this time I felt it was time to comment. You must be a very bossy and overbearing person to have to deal with in your real life.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 07:31 PM

Yes, Wolfgang, Gaza is still in dispute. There are many people in Israel who are still working very hard to prevent the handover of Gaza. I'll stop including Gaza in statements like that one after it's been handed over. A lot can happen between now and then.


On the subject of assumptions (and making an ass of one's self)...

When I post something in red letters, it is to increase the chances that my words will be seen. Any assumptions about my emotional state when I do so are nothing more than that - assumptions, and more often than not, they will be wrong assumptions.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 08:00 PM

I've got to 'fess up, Carol, you got me sussed. You clearly know me so well from my posts on this and other threads that you have worked out that I am a rude and presumptious individual, and bossy and overbearing too. My sweeping condemnations of large numbers of other people's posts must have been hard to ignore until now, so I fully understand that this time you had to do something about it.

Oh well, what can I do - friendless and unloved I remain...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 09:11 PM

Ah well---Carol---as usual your obsessive and compulsive comments---devoid of a debating formulation---other than your own narrow interests that make you then say "troll" leave me nothing but to say that there are more important things in our short, but hopefully, worthwhile lives, than to correspond with the obsessive kidnappers of a discussion to fulfill their futile and frustrating (to them---meaning you) agenda.

Happy Southern evenings dear compulsive and obsessive. May the thought of wider thinking and a more open mind visit upon you at some point in the near future


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 09:14 PM

I add here---that the London tragedy is a hell of a lot more germaine than your diatribes---and we should stay on that and mourn the loss of innocents from fanatics who, for whatever sick reason, believe they have the right to be judge, jury, and decide the fate of others. You may well applaud them---I say NO---swift justics should be meted out---when we are sure the right parties are "collared"

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 09:53 PM

The face of 911 in London happened to be British. The masterminds apparently left the country before the bombing. Pakistan seems to be a hotbed of terrorist training. So why not invade Pakistan instead of Iraq? This is a similar question; "The 911 terrorists were Arabs so why don't we seek out the terrorist in Saudi Arabia?"

Why the war in Iraq? You can't fight terrorists with military might. What is needed is good police work. This could be done without any war at all. Why can't the government understand this?

I am so sick of incompetence.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jul 05 - 11:26 PM

I could say the same about your remark regarding what you suppose I am like in the 3D world as well, El Greko.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 11:57 AM

OK, let's say "snap" and move on, Carol. I will suppose no longer.

Dianavan, I agree 100% with your "can't fight terrorism with military might" statement. It's the wrong size net for the fish you need to catch. In fact your statement applies even in the case of state-sponsored terrorism, which of course neither the London bombings nor 9/11 were.

Earlier today, when I heard that (one of) the bombmaker(s) was Egyptian and had been arrested in Cairo, it occurred to me that there will be those out there who will immediately shout "bomb Egypt". But that is the same mindlessness thar drives thugs to attack a sikh temple in the UK because they thought it was a mosque, or the early Crusaders to arrack christian villages in the M.East because the males wore turbans. But the truth is you can't fight bombs with bombs when it comes to terrorism.

Police work is indeed what is needed, and painstaking one at that. I confess I am rather surprised (pleasantly) at the swift progress made so far; these things can take years. I can only guess at the massive effort that has gone on to sift through the available evidence, and of course that mother's phone call was a lucky break.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 12:55 PM

No problem, El Greko.


I will be ignoring you from now on, Bill H, because that's how I have been instructed to respond to trolls. I have been assured that if I ignore you, you will go away.


dianavan... it's quite a gooey problem, isn't it? If we were to examine it all from the perspective of behavioral psychology, I think we would come up with some interesting and possibly rather disturbing questions.

In behavioral psychology, you look at what causes the behavior to increase (or decrease), and you also look at who benefits and in what way from the behavior in question (if the behavior persists), to try to find the reasons for what is happening.

So we might ask these questions...

- Who has benefitted (if anyone) from 9/11 and the London bombings?

- Has the "war on terror" caused the behavior to increase or decrease (or continue at the same level?)

- Has the invasion and occupation of Iraq caused the behavior to increase or decrease (or continue at the same level?

- Has the way the West has responded to the issue of militant Islam caused the behavior to increase or decrease (or continue at the same level)?


Some of these questions are not easy to answer. It would be difficult (maybe even impossible) to try to predict how many "terrorist" attacks might have happened had things been done differently. We can't really measure that. But we can measure an increase in the kinds of people who are engaging in these kinds of activities. For instance, the fact that the London bombers are supposed to all be people who were born and raised in Britain. And we can measure any increases in particular forms of "terrorism". For instance, the fact that the London bombings are supposed to be the first ever suicide bombings in Europe.

One could argue that 9/11 happened before the "war on terror", and before the invasion and occupation of Iraq. But there were other things happening that we could look to as possible causes for that. The question for now is, if we do this (whatever we happen to be contemplating), does the behavior increase, decrease, or remain at the same level, and who benefits from whatever we find to be the result?

The only reason I can think of why the people who are supposed to be dealing with this problem are not using a behavioral psychology approach to understanding it and dealing with it is because doing so might draw attention to behaviors of their own that they don't want to draw attention to.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 01:05 PM

Carol - While I basically agree with the above, I think that it is inaccurate to apply psychology to groups of people. Behavioral psychology can only be applied to individuals. Sociology deals with groups of people. To understand how those groups interract we need to look at the economy, politics and social status.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 06:41 PM

Oops. You're right, Wolfgang. I see my mistake now.

Dianavan, I don't think I can agree with you. Group dynamics are an important part of behavioral psychology. Behavioral psychology does not just deal with individuals. The size of the group is not important. Sociology also deals with groups of people (in different ways), and it can also be used as a tool for understanding why these kinds of things happen. But to not address group dynamics from the perspective of behavioral psychology leaves a very big hole in the total picture.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 06:45 PM

Wow---Carol---you took the course in Troll avoidance 101---bravo. Sadly you never found out the definition of that vis a vis a legitimate disagreement.

   Your next course should be Obsessive/Compulsive definition--101. Probably less expensive to get a mirror and look into it.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 07:07 PM

Sorry to burst in on carolc's party but, to return to the topic:

I assume Peter Woodruff is about twelve and a half years old, this is based upon what I know of kids who are already thirteen and who think conspiracy theories are quite amusing.

As for some of the people here who seem to go along with all of this clap trap, well, you need to get out more.

Bill, you need to follow Feminist Humour 101 - when someone creates it that is.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 07:22 PM

One example that comes to mind would be the phenomenon of scapegoating. The practice of scapegoating is very much something that can be examined and understood using the questions I posed in my 15 Jul 05 - 12:55 PM post, and it is something that can happen only in groups.

And scapegoating is a tool that is and has been used by governments and other powerful entities as a means of controling behavior. I would go so far as to say that it is a big part of the problem we see now.

In smaller groups, like families for instance, the practice of scapegoating creates a schism between the ones who are designated as "good" or some other term denoting acceptability, and the one(s) who are designated as "bad" or some other term denoting unacceptability. When this is the pattern, it's as though there are two sets of score cards. Only good marks go on the scorcards of the ones designated as "good" (and no bad marks, no matter how badly they behave), and only bad marks are put on the score card of the "bad" ones (no matter how "good" they behave).

And what we see when that happens is that the ones who are designated as "bad", usually end up rebelling against the group dynamic, sometimes in the form of addictions, sometimes in the form of the scapegoated one removing him or herself from the group (or family), or by exhibiting hostile behavior within the group. Such people can often function perfectly well outside the group without engaging in any of those behaviors, but when placed back in the group context, those behaviors emerge again.

In a scapegoating group dynamic, using the questions I posed earlier, it is possible to understand why people are behaving the way they are, and sometimes even to correct the situation (dynamic). For instance, the ones who are designated as "good" have something to gain from someone in the group being designated as "bad". While they criticize the ones who are designated as "bad", they actually need someone to be designated as "bad" in order to be able to identify themselves as "good". So they have to make a decision... would they prefer to let go of the need to elevate themelves at the expense of someone else, and to eliminate whatever disfunctional behaviors result from that dynamic, or would they prefer to maintain that dynamic and take the consequences.

In this particular context, if we ask the question; since the beginning of the "war on terror" have we seen an increase or a decrease in the kinds of people who engage in terrorist acts, or an increase in the kinds of terrorist acts being engaged in (or old kinds showing up in new places), the answer is "yes". If we ask, who gains (benefits) from this increase, we find that the most extreme elements of both sides of the conflict are the ones who gain (the gains for the US government, of course, being money and increased power). The people in the middle (the vast majority of people) lose.

So, since the people who are waging the "war on terror" are one of the groups who gain from the results of an increase of terrorist activities, we can extrapolate the possibility that this is, in fact, what they want. And we can look at any actions they may take or any behaviors they engage in as possibly being designed to produce this specific result.

This is a vastly oversimplified example. Obviously there are many other factors to consider. But it does give you an idea about how these questions can be used as a part of the total picture to help understand why people behave the way they do.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 05 - 07:49 PM

Jordan still has massive tits

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,H. Hogan (a real American)
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 11:25 AM

Bill Hahn is one of the most respected FolkDJ's in the country. CarolC spends all of her time making excuses for terrorists and attacking legitimate governments who stand up to them.

According to CarolC, anyone who disagrees with her, and that would be about 96% of all Americans, is a "troll." Thank God that the loonies-of-Mudcat like CarolC and Dianavan are not typical of the vast majority of people.

Don't worry Bill, you're in good company.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 11:57 AM

Thanks--H Hogan---for both thoughts

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 12:54 PM

Guest,H. Hogan (A Real American) AKA troll - "...the vast majority of people" do not hide behind a variety of pseudonyms to express their opinions. I have no 'beef' with Bill Hahn so please do not try to create a problem that does not exist. You are a coward and a bully. Thank goodness the vast majority of people are neither.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:05 PM

I don't see what H Hogan said that was cowardly or bullying. However I do find you naive and dangerous. You have posted over 3000 messages - I think it's time you got a life in the real world.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Frankham
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:12 PM

Ellen,

I believe that pulling US troops out of Iraq may not stop violence from occuring but I do think it would go a long way to diminish it somewhat in the Middle East. As long as US troops are on Iraqi soil, there can be no peace agreement. Unfortunately, the brokers in the Mid-East peace deal have no moral authority to do anything useful.. The Bush administration abdicated all moral authority by the pre-emptive invasion of a foreign country and is a spokesperson for violence in the world.

The fanatics are not identifiable at this time. They are there but they are unseen as long as the Bush propaganda machine makes them into a mythical hob goblin. Somewhere we have to come to terms why young men would blow themselves up to promulgate their beliefs. They must be shown a constructive alternative not a massive retaliation using the same means that they do.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:14 PM

He's a DJ!?

hahahahahahahaha...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,H. Hogan (a real American)
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:28 PM

CarolC,

If anyone around here is a troll, it's you and Dianavan.

Yes, Bill Hahn is a DJ. Along with Ron Olesko, he is the host of Traditions, one of the top folk music programs in the country.

You should tune in, you'd learn something about folk music, and about humanity.

WFDU Traditions

Bill is also the host of an excellent program of Jewish music called Sunday Simcha.

WFDU Sunday Simcha

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:33 PM

Give up Hogan she's not listening, by the way did you know diana thinks we're actually the same person. We must be 'cause she's always right.

Shakey

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,well
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:37 PM

dianavan said

"I have to admit to having similar thoughts. What better way to shift the attention of G8 away from global warming or the economics of the developing nations? What better way to cement the relationship between the U.S. and Britain than to bond their citizens in grief and dismay? What better way to increase the demand for a war on terror?"

"It somehow doesn't fit that this was an act of Muslim fanatics"

I think her UK and USA sabotage plot theory has been blown out of the water, the meeting between Bush and Blair to concoct the bombings I think you now know to be a little far fetched to say the least.

CarolC

Get a life

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:40 PM

I can have a productive discussion with anyone who holds different views than me if he or she is capable of discussing the actual issues rather than slinging personal abuse. But anyone who consistantly slings personal abuse is simply looking to get an emotional response... not discuss issues. Joe Offer has instructed us to not respond to people who are just trying to get an emotional response (trolling). I have said that I will follow Joe's instructions in this particular case. I find it interesting that Bill H finds this so threatening that he has to post under three different identities in this thread (Bill H, Hulk Hogan, and Shakey) to try to discredit my decision to ignore him.

LOL (DJ indeed... )

hahahahaha...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:47 PM

I'm not always right and I'm not interested in engaging in your stupid game. Grow up.

Once again, you are trying to de-rail a perfectly good thread.

You are like the face of 911 - anonymous and dangerous.

Frankham - You are exactly right. By occupying Iraq, we are creating more terrorists. It is also a very ineffective way to fight terrorism. What are we going to do, invade Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria and Iran? Since the London bombers were British, maybe Blair should slap his own face.

Armies are not intended to do police work.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,H. Hogan (a real American)
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:47 PM

CarolC,

YOU are the ultimate troll and beleive me, other than the Dianavan, everyone here knows it.

I not Bill Hahn. I have never even met the man. However, I have listened to him many times via the WFDU webstream.

Unlike you, he's someone who is a vital part of the folk music scene in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:48 PM

Yeah, sure.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Well
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 01:55 PM

"Since the London bombers were British, maybe Blair should slap his own face."

dianavan you did not have any credibility in the first place but any you had with anyone has just been totally lost with the above statement. Get a life.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 04:20 PM

Please read: http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=7025

Can someone help with a blue clicky?

From the article:

"Since 1990, the United States has stationed tens of thousands of ground troops on the Arabian Peninsula, and that is the main mobilization appeal of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. People who make the argument that it is a good thing to have them attacking us over there are missing that suicide terrorism is not a supply-limited phenomenon where there are just a few hundred around the world willing to do it because they are religious fanatics. It is a demand-driven phenomenon. That is, it is driven by the presence of foreign forces on the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. The operation in Iraq has stimulated suicide terrorism and has given suicide terrorism a new lease on life."

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 04:23 PM

Here you go...

http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=7025

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 04:30 PM

From the article in dianavan's link...

"This wealth of information creates a new picture about what is motivating suicide terrorism. Islamic fundamentalism is not as closely associated with suicide terrorism as many people think. The world leader in suicide terrorism is a group that you may not be familiar with: the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka.

This is a Marxist group, a completely secular group that draws from the Hindu families of the Tamil regions of the country. They invented the famous suicide vest for their suicide assassination of Rajiv Ghandi in May 1991. The Palestinians got the idea of the suicide vest from the Tamil Tigers.

TAC: So if Islamic fundamentalism is not necessarily a key variable behind these groups, what is?

RP: The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. From Lebanon to Sri Lanka to Chechnya to Kashmir to the West Bank, every major suicide-terrorist campaign-over 95 percent of all the incidents-has had as its central objective to compel a democratic state to withdraw."

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Well
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 04:45 PM

"These are random thoughts so please don't accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist"

dianavan you are a conspiracy theorist and a wrong one at that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 04:47 PM

well carolc [cat was away awhile] big stink if we look at a damn koran wrong,the muslim fanatics behead someone,nobody blinks.
its ok for them there claim to fame is fear,the same game our pol's are playing with us to shorten the leash,ours just haven't started killing us outright yet[that we know of]

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 04:54 PM

One more bit from the article. jpk, this one's for you...

"TAC: That would seem to run contrary to a view that one heard during the American election campaign, put forth by people who favor Bush's policy. That is, we need to fight the terrorists over there, so we don't have to fight them here.

RP: Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us."

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 05:01 PM

for the most part there killing each other;it is sick when it is ok to kill a bunch of kids to futher your agenda,plus if they would stop making it headline news,its effectiveness would fade fast.
the media's # 1 rule for reporting,if it bleeds it leads.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Jul 05 - 05:19 PM

it is sick when it is ok to kill a bunch of kids to futher your agenda

It is indeed. And the US government and its allies have killed many, many more kids than any terrorists have to further their agendas. That's a big part of the reason that there are any "terrorists" in the first place. The "terrorists'" agenda is to get us to leave them alone and stop killing them and their kids. Our agenda is to occupy their land and steal and/or take control of their resources.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Jul 05 - 01:33 AM

hear, hear!

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Jul 05 - 04:25 AM

The majority here on Mudcat and in the media seem to be of the opinion thatto attempt to rationalise the London bombings is a bad thing.

The current thinking from most of us is that we should continue the "War on Terror", tighten up on civil rights at home and generally never give in to the terrorists, without giving any regard to whether this course of action has worked in the past.

Blair appeared on TV today, saying that to link the London bombings with UK foreign policy was ludicrous, without giving any credible reason for his statement.

In most of the past conflicts involving terrorist action,where military force was used against the terrorists, the terrorist were not defeated, by ended up achieving most of their objectives.
The examples of Northern Ireland, Chetnyia,Vietnam, prove my point.

In Iraq and our policy has produced a culture of terrorism and a threat to ourselves which was not there before the invasion.

The injustice of how the war was sold to the British people has also pruduced a deep sense of resentment among young Muslims, and the blame for this lies with Mr Blair personally, as he was instrumental in pushing the discredited "reasons for war".

The most important point as far as I am concerned, is that suicide bombing does not become commonplace in the UK as it has in Iraq, and sticking to a failed policy and trying to justify past crimes by our politicians certainly won't keep us safe....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 17 Jul 05 - 06:09 AM

carolC, the terrorist supporter said:

The "terrorists'" agenda is to get us to leave them alone and stop killing them and their kids. Our agenda is to occupy their land and steal and/or take control of their resources.

Tell that to the family of Theo Van Gogh. "Naive" doesn't even come close.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Jul 05 - 12:13 PM

Shakey, the supporter of state sponsored terrorism said:

Tell that to the family of Theo Van Gogh. "Naive" doesn't even come close.

That's an interesting point. Has that murder been officially designated as "terrorism"? If it has, then I guess we'll have to put the murder of Yitzhak Rabin in the category of terrorism as well. Yes, that certainly does open up a whole other interesting can of worms.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 17 Jul 05 - 08:28 PM

Now we see---as if we did not know the trouble with screen names. For a long while now I have objected to people not posting their real names---as I do.   Carol C has a point---she cannot believe shat she sees.   Too many people---and some who post here, probably, use various names.   I don't.

I have not met "H Hogan"(only heard about his wrestling career) ---do not know him, but certainly express my thanks for his kind words and courtesy.   The proof of his identity is that he knows of one of my other 2 programs (Sunday Simcha--Jewish oriented and with a tilt toward "folk" in the Jewish tradition). I have never mentioned it here. Nor the 3d program---Tabletalk which chats w/ people in arts and lit---and---Carol---you will love this--one of my guests was the author of a book on the 1967 War in Israel.   Michael Oren. A scholar that I doubt you would debate very well.

In any case I just wanted to clear up the problem some have with identity and the internet. I am--ME. No other person. WOujld that we all kept our true identities.

Now---with the kidnapping of the thread by certain zealots--I hesitate to use Carol's favorite word---Trolls---perhaps we can get back to a serious contemplation of the sad events of recent history in London---which is what this started out to be.

The One--The Only---and you will note on this list there are others of us who are using our real names for the sake of truth in "advertising"

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 11:20 AM

Oh, good. That means I don't have to ignore Mr. Hogan (yet).

Hulk, I think you misunderstand the source of my amusement. I'm not laughing because I don't believe Bill H is a DJ. I'm laughing because the term "DJ" is so perfectly apt in this particular case..

Now Ron Olesko, I have some respect for. He is a serious professional who deserves the designation of "radio announcer" rather than DJ. He's not a vain little peacock, or a prima donna. And he's a kind and conscientious human being.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 12:40 PM

Michael Oren (among others).

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 12:59 PM

Why is the fact that someone is a DJ, however well regarded, seen as somehow relevant in a non-music thread? I mean, maybe it's interesting, but...
................

Pity this thread's been soured up so. It's always a mistake to respond to personal attacks, or rise to intentional provocation by people making posts that oversimplify or distort the facts, but I think the main blame when this happens lies with those who set out to provoke the reaction rather than than the people who react.

It seemed to me that it made sense for a thread more about how people in London and around were reacting to the bombings, alongside the other one which seemed to be shaping up to be more about the whys and wherefores. And I know this one started out as a conspiracy thread, but threads drift, and this seemed to be drifting in a useful way for a while. So I'll try to drift it back.

..........
We went up to London on Friday 15th - we'd been planning to go the previous Friday, but the day after the bombings seemed a bit soon. Still you can't put things off too long, or you'd never do anything.

Can't say people seemed particularly nervous, either on the train, the tube or the riverbus we took down to Kew Gardens, which was our destination. They checked the bags on the boat going out, but for some reason not coming back. (Incidentally the boat going out had a plaque on the wall and a poster explaining how it had been one of those which took part in the Dunkirk evacuation. These boats last a long time)

On the way back we stopped off in Trafalgar Square, where they were showing the First Night of the Proms on a giant screen. Thinnish crowd, but that might have been because it was Michael Tippet's music, rather than because of bombs. Normal mixed up London crowd. We noticed a lady in full head-to toe burkha sitting on a bench listening to the music.

One thing, on the way home, first on a bus and then on a train, a fellow passenger was eager to start a conversation with us, which normally doesn't tend to happen with Londoners. Maybe that might have reflected a reaction to the odd times, and a way of dispelling the tension - if people travelling by Public Transport in London became a bit friendlier instead of ignoring each other that would be an unlooked for and healthy by-product of the bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 01:41 PM

Iraq war officially linked to London bombing.......
Todays news.

We knew the threat before the invasion...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 02:18 PM

Ah, Carol--again you go back to Israel---and, of course found a site that backs your views. I do admit that they probably have better debating points than you can come up with---probably why you selected that site---and made it look like it was Michael Oren's. Oh well, fairness is not in your lexicon.

You do remember London and the original thread. Don't you?

By the way---I agree w/McGrath's comment---Host/DJ--all irrelevent in this thread. I do, however, appreciate the kind thoughts and, surely, expected nothing different from Carol who prides herself as always being some sort of wounded party. What did old Bill Shakespeare say --"...hell hath no fury as a woman---you know the rest".

Carol---your fovrie radio host and interviewer of people of substance.

Shalom and Salaam---but most of all cheerio.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:16 PM

"Smiler with a knife"...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 04:59 PM

LOL, McGrath. I'm going to have to remember that one.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Memory of Martin Gibson
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:08 PM

Carol C is and will always be a Jew hater and enemy of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:09 PM

Oops. Looks like I posted a link to the second page of the article from The Nation. The article is a review of a few books, one of them, the book by Michael Oren that was previously mentioned in this thread.

Here it is, from the beginning...

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040531&c=1&s=beinin

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:12 PM

I do find that a lot of people who are apologists for the policies of the government of Israel tend to resort almost exclusively to the use of character assasination against those who do not agree with the policies of the government of Israel. And this is because they are trying to defend the indefensible, so character assasination is the only tool they've got to work with. This thread contains numerous examples of this practice.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:23 PM

you know it is kinda funny,but if this was a bunch of peaceable people in the first place,no one would of had so easy a time of coming to the fore with a reson/excuse to do anything about it
then to if the britts and there euro neibors had of stayed away from the arab world in the first place the world would be a little different today,all the arab islamist would have probly killed each other off a while back
even if the entire western world was to withdraw and close themselfs within there own borders,it would not stop,those in power in the arab world need us badly,with out the west to be there scape goats,there own subjects/victims really might see the real reason for there prblems,and rebel aginst them[there own leaders followed by there hate and fear blinded rabble]there only real means of control is to foster hate and fear[our own leaders are learning how to play us the same way;just not as well]

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 05:47 PM

CarolC,

Please provide some documentation on your statement "And the US government and its allies have killed many, many more kids than any terrorists have to further their agendas. "

Do you mean the US over its lifetime? Just this administration? All terrorists of any type?


The Turks are presently our allies ( in theory): Do you claim the 21+million Armenians killed as the responsibility of the US? How about the tens of millions killed by Stalin- He was out "ally" during WWII.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 06:00 PM

Would someone kindly translate jpk's offering.

Thank you

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 06:23 PM

jpk, if they were going to kill themselves before we ever started interfering with their societies and appropriating their natural resources, why weren't they all dead already before we got there? That's some pretty convoluted rationalizing you're engaging in there.


Please provide some documentation on your statement "And the US government and its allies have killed many, many more kids than any terrorists have to further their agendas."

Interesting request. I think for now, I'll just provide examples. I'm sure you won't have any difficulty finding documentation to support them. But if you do, let me know and I'll round some up for you.

- The indigenous people of the part of North America that is now the US. The government of the US is responsible for killing, in cold blood, many thousands of Indian women and children.

- Any children of African origin/ancestry who were slaves in the United States, and who died because of their captivity, were killed by the policies of the US government and its agendas.

- Any children killed by the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan.

- Any children who were killed by the US military in the wars in Korea, Vietnam, and the US bombing campaigns in Cambodia (more than a half million civilians were killed by US bombs during the bombing campaigns in Cambodia).

- Any children who were killed by any US government sponsored covert operations in South and Central America.

- Any children who were killed by proxy fighters who were fighting on behalf of the US, including any Iranian children who were killed by Saddam Hussien, any children killed by the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, any children killed by US forces in Afghanistan, any children killed by the US led invasion and occupation of Iraq.

I'm sure I'm forgetting some other examples right now, but I can post them as I think of them. I think it would be a bit difficult to find exact numbers for these kinds of things because the US government really couldn't give a poop how many children it kills and would prefer to keep the numbers left unknown. But I think it would be safe to assume that it easily adds up to more than a million in the history of the US.

Do you mean the US over its lifetime?

US over its lifetime.

All terrorists of any type?

I guess that depends on how you define "terrorist". If you're talking about state sponsored terrorism, then my statement that you quoted is rendered useless because of the fact that the US, itself, is a major sponsor of state sponsored terrorism. I also would not include genocide campaigns between ethnic groups like the one in Rwanda or the genocides in the Balkans as terrorism. Those were genocides, and have a very different purpose than terrorism.

The Turks are presently our allies ( in theory): Do you claim the 21+million Armenians killed as the responsibility of the US? How about the tens of millions killed by Stalin- He was out "ally" during WWII.

No, I do not claim that the US is responsible for the children killed by its allies (unless they do it at the behest of the US, as Saddam Hussein did). And the statement by me that you quoted does not even suggest that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 07:17 PM

Carol I have to admit you're good, you must have a first class honours degree in sophistry. But, in the end, bovine excrement is still just bullshit.

How do you manage to walk anywhere with that enormous chip on your shoulder. The guilt that you carry, simply for being in the west, must be crushing you.

Sure the US has made mistakes but they've also contributed one hell of a lot of good things to this world. You are spouting your nonsense on a US developed machine because they defended your right to do so three times in the last hundred years.

Spout all you want, the UK has just voted Blair to power for the third time with a massive majority - after the invasion of Iraq. The US did a similar job with Bush. You may rant and rave all you want and five people here on this forum will see it, meanwhile, real people will be working 12 hours a day to ensure you can keep on doing it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 07:30 PM

You make a hell of a lot of assumptions, Shakey. beardedbruce asked me some questions and I answered them. If the best you have to offer of your own point of view is insults and taunts, rather than anything of substance, then you must not have much of anything to offer at all.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 07:59 PM

Oh, did I touch a nerve?

There is life outside of this forum and I prefer to do my talking where it matters, here I simply like to point out, to the passerby, some of the gross nonsense that is written, much of it by you.

I'm not baiting anyone, in fact please don't respond, it doesn't matter. All the posts stay on record for everyone to read, people can make their own mind up.

In the beginning i thought you were just naive but now I think you actually believe the pseudo-intellectual clap-trap that you copy and paste from hither and thither, if you ever get to the stage where you also understand it God help us.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 08:05 PM

Oh, did I touch a nerve?

More assumptions. But I notice that you still haven't actually said anything, so I know I can safely breeze on past your posts without worrying that I might actually miss anything.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 18 Jul 05 - 08:31 PM

We are easily distrated by assumptions.
We are distracted by the soap opera news reports about who did what - SEE THE BACKPACKS - ITS THEM!

You should not be distracted by the rules of war or how much torture is too much torture. You should only be concerned with War itself. This current war is one in which we have been assured will be a long, on going, and some seem to think, a never ending war.

All war waltzes in on a lie. Every war is promised to end a dispute once and for all or even be the war to end all wars. The Bush wars promise freedom and peace and democracy. Well after about 20 years starting with Desert Storm, where is it? That's right its still coming with no time table to gum up the works.

War promises it will deliver the goods.
But it never does.
The enemy is war itself.

I hear intelligent people rationalizing why we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. "To get the 9-11 perpetrators" they often say.
If that were true we would have invaded Pakistan and follow up with Saudi Arabia.
But we can't do that. Pakistan would retaliate with nuclear weapons in haste and the Saudi oil fields would become jeopardized. India would in turn need to join in and China would of course be concerned that they are downwind of all the fall out.

Even these fatuous speculations are a distraction from the issue of war as a tool of the proletariat against the poor, the powerful against the powerless, the government against its people and the greatest profit scheme of all time.

Every great social advance has come from people's movements such as, democracy over monarchy, women's rights, civil rights. In the opposite column people say that war inspires the greatest technological advancements.
I'd venture to say that war inspires anti war movements. That's why the best planned invasions always begin with propoganda and extortion to neutralize dissent.
If you need a case study, study the Hitler Youth, or just watch the 4 hour special on the History Channel. If you are not too fogged up with propaganda thinking patterns you could even watch the GE owned NBC with a critical eye and see the tawdry tinsel covered sell job for war.

None of this is to say there are not things worth fighting for:
When in the course of human events...I will fight any tyranny over the mind of man...The only thing to fear is fear itself.
Great men have waged war to end war. Losers usually start them : The Confederacy, Germany, Japan, Alexander the Great, GWB.


Today one of our great and honored Republican Congressmen said If we are attacked by any nuclear device we will first nuke every Muslim holy site beginning with Mecca.

Ya gotta love these Republicans.


No one else will.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 09:20 AM

Blair's "massive majority" was an artifact created by a distorted electoral system, together with a virtually defunct opposition party.He received the lowest share of the actual vote of any party wining a majority in nearly two centuries. 36% of the vote, equivalent to 22% of the electorate.

I see the proponents of the "Forget the ball - go for the man," style of argument are still puffing around the pitch. (Except it tends to be "go for the woman".)

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,FG
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 09:49 AM

We have all learned the ritual. First come the explosions, the grief, the unbelief. How could anyone do such a thing to innocent men and women? Then, as predictably as the sound of emergency sirens follows a terrorist blast, come the calls for Muslim leaders to condemn the bombings.

When will Muslims rise up against terrorism, Westerners ask on both sides of the Atlantic. This will end, we are told, only when Muslim leaders make it clear to their people that suicide bombings constitute an affront to their humanity and their God.

All true, no doubt. But there is a secret about terrorism that nobody dares to mention: Westerners themselves, for all their sound and fury, have not wholeheartedly condemned terrorism. Not really. Not with the unequivocal conviction they now demand of Muslims.

The secret we have all heard with our own ears is that until now, terrorism, in its most frequent guise - against Israelis and Iraqis - is analyzed, explained, and all but forgiven by Europe's mainstream, by more than a few people in North America and by Mudcatters like CarolC and Dianavan. Terrorists are absolved as long as they are seen as weak or desperate, and their enemy is viewed as a cruel Goliath.

How could a young British Muslim growing up in Leeds, England, come to believe that a suicide bombing is an appropriate way to express a grievance? Very simple. He would watch the news. He would listen to the way British thinkers respond to bombings of Israeli civilians by Palestinian terrorists, and to how terrorist attacks in Iraq are described.

In much of Europe, suicide bombings targeting Israeli civilians do not receive anything remotely resembling the blanket condemnation demanded of Muslims after July 7.

This is not to argue that Israeli tactics must be embraced, or that the objectives of Palestinians must be rejected. But if the British want to tell the world - especially people living within their borders - that terrorism is wrong, they have to declare without nuance and equivocation that attacks designed and executed for the deliberate purpose of murdering civilians for political goals are morally wrong and completely unacceptable - always - no matter the victims, the perpetrators or the political views of either side. That is plainly not what has happened until now.

When the wave of suicide bombings slaughtering Israelis reached its most gruesome depths in 2002, with almost weekly bombings shattering lives and leaving human body parts strewn in cafes, buses and restaurants throughout Israel, the British took to the streets, and CarolC posted endlessly on Mudcat, to condemn Israel and express their sympathy for Palestinians. The terrorist bombings, by all appearances, were a huge success.

One year later, Mohammed Sadiq Khan travelled from London to Tel Aviv and helped organize a nightclub bombing that killed three Israelis. Then he returned to London and blew himself up in the July 7 attacks.
After the London bombings, British Home Secretary Charles Clarke told an emergency meeting of European ministers that the right not to be bombed to bits outweighs any other civil liberty.

That's now. But in April 2002, when Israelis were going out of their minds with grief and fear, the European public reacted with massive street demonstrations condemning Israel's admittedly draconian efforts to stop the bloodshed, and demanding that Israelis give in to Palestinian demands. Condemnation of anti-Israel terrorism was not high on the agenda.

What message would a young impressionable Muslim glean from such an event? If you feel strongly about a cause, blow yourself up. People will pay attention. They will agree with you, and your cause will benefit.

Paul Berman has a theory about the demonization of Israel in the face of the terrorist slaughter. For those who believe a rational logic governs the world, he argues, the only way to make sense of such acts is to portray Israel as deserving the punishment. And so, terrorism is explained and forgiven. Just look at the thousands of posts by CarolC on the topic over the past several years on Mudcat.

The British, and much of Europe, have grown so tolerant of terrorism that they refuse to call it by its real name. The policy of the BBC, and the London-based news agency Reuters, is not to use the word "terrorist" unless quoting someone else's words.

Even if you don't label it, bombing a train full of commuters is terrorism. And if you want to tell the world terrorism is wrong, you have to say exactly that. Otherwise, you'll find yourself wondering, how could it happen here?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 09:57 AM

Oh my God statistics. We have the system that we have, is it perfect? No. Is it the same for everyone? Yes.

Now you start talking about a sport. Sorry but this isn't a game, peoples lives are at stake. I will continue to have a go at any apologist for terror that I come across. I'm not saying you are, but they exist on this forum and I'll have a go at their arguments and their motives in equal measure.

I have always thought that Blair is a decent bloke but as far as this subject is concerned he swung it totally with his speach to the US senate in 2003. Unlike carol I can't be bothered to copy and paste all day long if you want to read it then read it if you don't, don't.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 09:58 AM

Paul Berman has a theory about the demonization of Israel in the face of the terrorist slaughter. For those who believe a rational logic governs the world, he argues, the only way to make sense of such acts is to portray Israel as deserving the punishment. And so, terrorism is explained and forgiven. Just look at the thousands of posts by CarolC on the topic over the past several years on Mudcat.

Israel doesn't deserve punishment. Nobody does. But Israel is directly responsible for the situation it finds itself in (as is the US), and it needs to acknowlege and correct this if it ever wants to see an end to the problem of terrorism. Demonizing me isn't going to solve the problem. It just provides you and others like you with a handy scapegoat so you won't have to deal with reality.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:02 AM

Was this a thread about the recent bombing in London? Are you so determined to prove a point about Israel that you are not addressing the issues of this thread? Are you getting stuck into anyone who has a different view? Do you consider yourself right, and everyones else to be ignorant?

Are You a "Right-Fighter"?

Do you find yourself needing to "win" arguments? Do people ask you why you always have to be right? Does conflict you engage in typically end with you having the last word, but no one feels good about the argument? If you have said yes to any of these questions, you are likely a right-fighter!

A right-fighter is someone who needs to win arguments. To be seen as right, you also NEED to make someone else seem wrong. A right-fighter gets overly emotional or angry when people do not agree with them and their opinions or beliefs. A right-fighter is someone who insists on having the last word in an argument or refuses to back down no matter what.

People who are right-fighters, (or those who are driven by the need to be right), have their value or worth literally attached to the outcome of being right. The "right-fighter" desperately believes (unconsciously) that others must agree with her to feel ok about him/herself.
   
Right-Fighting is an acceptable form of violence or aggression. Because the right-fighting pattern usually ends up one sided and includes a winner and a loser, the effects are similar to those of physical abuse. Learned submission on the part of the children and often the other parent/spouse is inevitable. "Right-Fighting" is in fact a form of emotional abuse.

If you have found that you may have some qualities of a right- fighter, don't start beating yourself up, begin working on it! You are a wonderful and lovable person with far more positive qualities than negative... this is certain! This habit does NOT have to define you. You are capable of releasing this habit at any time (please seek help if you need it, a partner in change is always a wonderful gift to yourself and your family!). Acknowledging your habit of right-fighting and becoming aware when you are engaging in this habit is the first, most important step in leading a more successful and happy life.

"Right-fighters": Begin to gently remind yourself of your unchanging value and worth during arguments and disagreements, whether or not you fully believe it. "Fake it till you make it"! Begin to imagine what conflict would be like if the outcome was not important. Begin to allow others to hold one opinion and you another without having ill or hurt feelings. What would life be like to be loved, cared for and respected rather than being "right"? Try validating others' opinions as equally valuable. This doesn't mean you must agree, only to say "yes" you and your view are as valuable as mine". I promise you, peace will begin to flow into your life....

Meanwhile, back in London..

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:23 AM

Sorry guest but the "you and your view are as valuable as mine" attitude is what is getting the west into the trouble that it's in. Political correctness gone crazy, tolerating the intolerable. The furthest I can go is "your right to hold your view is as valuable as my right to hold mine". It's childish nonsense to even suggest that all views are equal.

At the risk of becoming pythonesque and stating the bleedin' obvious will you accept the view that it's fair to torture children because you think they are posessed by devils: is this a "valuable view"?

You spell well for a Guardian reader.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:32 AM

Not at all, Guest,19 Jul 05 - 10:02 AM. How about you? If people don't want to talk about Israel in this thread, all they have to do is not bring it up. I know I haven't.

But I have addressed the subject of this thread, which is not just the bombings in London, but is actually about whether or not the governments of the US and Britain are responsible for 9/11 and the recent bombings in London. I don't think I necessarily agree with Peter's original premise, but I do think it's worth looking at how the behavior of these two governments contributes to the problem. And that IS the subject of this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:50 AM

So if the US and UK governments go away, so will the Israel problems, I dont think so.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 10:56 AM

Carol wrote:

" But I have addressed the subject of this thread, which is not just the bombings in London, but is actually about whether or not the governments of the US and Britain are responsible for 9/11 and the recent bombings in London. I don't think I necessarily agree with Peter's original premise, but I do think it's worth looking at how the behavior of these two governments contributes to the problem. And that IS the subject of this thread."

Well I've read it and re-read it but bugger me I can't find anything wrong with it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 11:09 AM

So if the US and UK governments go away, so will the Israel problems, I dont think so.

I'm not sure I understand what point you are trying to make. I don't think anybody has suggested that any governments should go away. But I do think it would be constructive to for these governments make some changes in the way they do things.

However, if you are saying that if Israel corrects the way it does things, the problem of terrorism against it will not go away, I disagree with you on that point. I'm not saying that no terrorist act will ever be committed aginast Israel ever again, if it corrects its behavior. But I am saying that if Israel ends the occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem (and ends the appropriation of the water resources of these areas), terrorism against Israel will, at the very least, become an extremely rare occurance.

But if you would rather not talk about Israel, that would suit me just fine.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 11:19 AM

I agree with carol in as much that Isreal has to give land back but I'm not convinced that this would make Isreal a safe place. As with Cuba there's not much chance that the US would ever settle while a lunatic was in power but now he's gone they really should do more.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 11:20 AM

Guest FG - You said, "by Mudcatters like CarolC and Dianavan. Terrorists are absolved as long as they are seen as weak or desperate, and their enemy is viewed as a cruel Goliath."

At no time have I absolved terrorists from their criminal acts. To find a solution, the problem must be understood. Yes, I do try to find what motivates them and try not to get sidetracked by blanket statements issued by our lying and corrupt politicians. In this 'war against terrorism', nobody is right. Just because I criticize Bush and Blair, doesn't mean I'm defending terrorism.

You seem to think everything is black and white. I happen to think that there are many shades of grey.

I'd appreciate it if you could stick to the discussion and quit making this personal. Take your mask off make your argument without taking pot shots and distorting the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 05:53 PM

let me guess a little bit here carolc,i bet that you just adored jfk,you thought that johnson was ok because of his civil rights stance,that you abhoared nam,and nixon because of nam,you blessed watergate for doing away with that warmongering nixon.hay a nice d'y ay'w'y.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 05:58 PM

ps carolc;i wonder how you would excuse the kraut's and jap's behavior during[aswell as prior to] ww2,and that it was all the us's fault.
oh please don't call them japs and krauts,you might hurt there self essteam,and feelings.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:08 AM

More often than not, when people talk about the importance of being "100 per cent against terrorism", they then go on to indicate some exception for some variety of terrorism they happen to see as justifiable, such as that carried out by governments.

Trying to understand why something is happening is not the same as accepting and condoning it. That applies as much to acts of terror carried out by dissidents as it does to acts of terror carried out by governments.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 09:54 AM

Oh, these guilty pleasures and smiles when scanning this thread:

Seeing Carol and Dianavan quoting approvingly from The American Conservative

Seeing them praising the extreme conservative expert Robert Pape of Bombing to win fame. Before the Iraq war (Novemeber 2001) he was quoted: University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape, author of the book Bombing to Win, thinks the air war might take as long as a year — which may be a lot longer than the American people would support. . Give me Bobert for a change.

Seeing Dianavan describing her thoughts as 'random thoughts'. Well, I know what that expression means; but imagine the pleasure of reading 'random' in a verbatim sense as for instance 'lacking coherence'. I wouldn't have dared to say that.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: freda underhill
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:31 AM

Something to consider is the effect the bombings must have had on the people of London. The people who live there are the ones who deserve the time and space to work out how to deal with it all, without being ripped apart by a cacophany people with bones to pick.

it's like what brucie says about people who crowd around ambulance scenes like vultures.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:11 AM

Wrong on all counts, jpk.

I have no position on JFK other than that he was a politician and I have no doubt that he committed some horrible crimes. I know LBJ committed some horrible crimes. I have mixed feelings about Nixon.

I would not excuse the behavior of the Germans or the Japanese during WWII, which by the way, the behavior of the US, with it's invasion of a sovereign country that didn't pose an imminent threat, most closely resembles. I do not "exuse" the behavior of terrorists. I only try to show how we are helping to create the problem of terrorism with our behavior, rather than to help eliminate it.

Enjoy your smugness now, Wolfgang... you'll have reason to feel differently soon enough, I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:16 AM

"I would not excuse the behavior of the Germans or the Japanese during WWII, which by the way, the behavior of the US, with it's invasion of a sovereign country that didn't pose an imminent threat, most closely resembles."

I feel a macism coming on...

You cannot be serious

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:35 AM

Try to read the exact words, Shakey. "Most" in this case is important. It does not mean "exactly the same". I will also add this distinction... "between the two entities in question, 'the terrorists' and a sovereign state (the US), the behavior of the US most closely resembles that of the Germans and Japanese during WWII".

And it does.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:40 AM

Would you like a spade?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:45 AM

You certainly have a right to disagree with me, Shakey. But sarcasm doesn't really help you to communicate your disagreement with any kind of coherency.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:47 AM

It floats my boat

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:51 AM

It floats my boat

Is that what they're calling it these days?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:57 AM

Wow, so you don't know everything after all.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 12:51 PM

On the More Galloway thread I expressed the opinion that Blair's policy in Iraq was responsible for bringing the suicide bombers onto the streets of London and making the UK a target for terrorism.

Shakey responded with the remark that "We should be proud to be the No1 terget for the fundamentalist terrorists".
I wonder if the families of the dead in London feel the same pride as Shakey.

To me there is little difference between the sentiments expressed by
Shakey and those held by the suicide bombers.

Shakey stated that he saw Carol, Diana and "others" on this forum as "dangerous", in reality it is people like Shakey who are dangerous with their dogmatic fight to the death mentality.

The best post on this thread in my opinion came from McGrath, who said
"Trying to understand why something is happening, is not the same as condoning or accepting it"

Carol and Diana, whether you agree with them or not always attempt to rationalise their subject.

Shakey on the other hand appears an ignorant bully with little of value to say about terrorism and its causes, and what he does say seems destructive and dangerous.

In many ways he reminds me of the late un-lamented Teribus....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 01:11 PM

Wolfgang - I quoted Robert Pape to show you that even conservatives disagree with Blair's remark that the London bombings had nothing to do with Iraq. Just because I quoted him doesn't mean I like him or that I appove of everything he has to say.

Random thoughts referred to my first post. At that point, nothing was coherent.

Get off my case, Wolfgang, and make your point with clarity and cohesiveness. I will read it with a grain of salt.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson's Truth
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 04:45 PM

"Carol and Diana, whether you agree with them or not always attempt to rationalise their subject."

That's complete bullshit.

Those two are the most irrational here. They pull any common sense here to a new low in the guise of an arguement moron to moron.

Girls. The "bombers" WERE Moslem terrorists. Not Catholic terrorsts, Hindu terrorists, or even terrorists from another planet. Just like on 9/11, they were MOSLEM terrorists.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 04:55 PM

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/editorial_feb0704.htm

"As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far as a result of the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq . These reports provide figures which range between a minimum of 8,235 and a maximum of 10,079 as of Saturday 7th February 2004...

...So far, in the "war on terror" initiated since 9-11, the USA and its allies have been responsible for over 13,000 civilian deaths, not only the 10,000+ in Iraq, but also 3,000+ civilian deaths in Afghanistan, another death toll that continues to rise long after the world's attention has moved on...

...Elsewhere in the world over the same period, paramilitary forces hostile to the USA have killed 408 civilians in 18 attacks worldwide (see Table 1). Adding the official 9-11 death toll (as of October 29th 2003) brings the total to just under 3500...

...For each civilian killed by "terrorists" on and since 9-11, the USA and its allies have brought about almost four non-combatant, civilian deaths in return...

One might ask how it is possible to claim that the deaths of some 4,500 civilians at the hands of paramilitaries demonstrates "utter contempt for innocent life" when the blood of some 14,000 innocents staining our own hands is considered noble and necessary. Tony Blair provided the following answer on 20th November, standing alongside George W Bush in London:

    'This terrorism is the 21st century threat. It is a war that strikes at the heart of all that we hold dear, and there is only one response that is possible or rational: to meet their will to inflict terror with a greater will to defeat it; to confront their philosophy of hate with our own of tolerance and freedom; and to challenge their desire to frighten us, divide us, unnerve us with an unshakeable unity of purpose; to stand side by side with the United States of America and with our other allies in the world, to rid our world of this evil once and for all.'

The claim that a strategy which produces 14,000 civilian deaths is the expression of a "philosophy of tolerance and freedom" is a claim which we find incomprehensible. Our incomprehension is shared, we believe, by the majority of the world's people."


GUEST,MGT, you are a hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:08 PM

ok carol i will just accept your contention that the us is responsible for all the ill's of the world,walk away shaking my head in wonder.marveling over a possition governed by passion and not reason.
now we should all just turn and walk away,as they stab our backs,an lop off our heads[its ok for them the little book says so].
don't

swing to hard mohamed,it might hurt.
aiso i can't imagen you not haveing an oppinion on anything.
have a nice day any way.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:13 PM

...For each civilian killed by "terrorists" on and since 9-11, the USA and its allies have brought about almost four non-combatant, civilian deaths in return...



Above is what the fairminded Carol wrote. Note that I condemn the war in Iraq---as to the rest of her thoughts---see my earliest post in this thread (on LONDON --9/11)   and my comment about running out of cheeks to turn. That sums it up.

We are not innocent vis a vis oil and other matters, but if some people have certain beliefs and want to live in tents, the desert, or other inhospitable places I believe they should be allowed to do so---at the same time they should allow those of us who have a different standard to do the same. Again---no more cheeks left to turn.

Carol:

--your favorite radio persona,


Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:15 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Pax Americana Kills More Iraqis
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 19 Jul 05 - 06:04 PM

BAGHDAD, Iraq (Reuters) -- U.S.-led forces, insurgents and criminal gangs have killed nearly 25,000 civilians, police and army recruits since the war began in March 2003, according to a survey by Iraq Body Count, a U.S.-British non-government group.

Nearly half the deaths occurred in Baghdad, where a fifth of Iraq's 25 million people live, according to media reports that Iraq Body Count has surveyed.

The second-highest death toll was in the former insurgent stronghold of Falluja, where one in every 137 of the town's population has died violently.

Of the total, nearly 37 percent were killed by U.S.-led forces, according to the group.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/07/19/iraq.bodycount.reut/index.html

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:22 PM

jpk, you are being melodramatic. What we need to do is correct our behavior. That's all.

beardedbruce, ALL of the people who died in Iraq died because of the US led invasion and occupation of that country, regardless of who killed them.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:34 PM

tell that to the ones that sadam helped to an early pit.
bye now this subject is going nowhere[to much passion,not enough reason].
see yall in a diff thread maybe.
have a nice day.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:43 PM

CarolC,


I do not agree with your last statement.


ALL of the people who died in Iraq died because of the failure of Saddam to comply with his obligations under international law and the terms of the ceasefire.

AND because so many people out there failed to even suggest that perhaps Saddam should comply with the UN resolutions, while they told the world that the US should do nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson's Truth
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:56 PM

I am not a hypcrite CarolC for saying that the terrorists in London and 9/11 were Moslem terrorists. They were and they are.

Your political correctness and denial of the subject along with sidestepping that this is the real issue in identifying who the enemy is will obviously result in more terrorism by miltiant Moslems. These are not peace loving people. They have to be stopped, destroyed, killed. And if it takes flushing them out of the peaceful group who share this dark ages religion that confuses it's followers, so be it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:56 PM

beardedbruce, you seem to be saying that all of those innocent civilians deserved to die because Saddam didn't jump when we told him to.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 05:58 PM

GUEST,MGT... you are wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 06:09 PM

Akenaton, who are you calling a bully you little pipsqueak.

Look you've tried it on once, failed, dug yourself a hole: why didn't you stay in it?

I said that we should be proud to be a main target, I didn't say we should be happy about it. This country has a history of standing up and being counted, we'd obviously be complete history if we counted on you standing up.

We shouldn't tolerate the intolerence of these pathetic people who wish to roll the clock back a thousand years and remove our freedoms, The freedoms that many people have given their lives to protect.

You may sit in your cozy little box beleiving that really they are just misunderstood scalliwags who will all of a sudden become friendly if Isreal gives up land, the US pulls out of Iraq, Salmon Rushdie repents, we ban all film making criticising eastern culture etc etc etc.

It's not the US they hate, nor the UK, it's western liberalism.

They are fascists, not so pure and not so simple, just where do you want to draw a line in the sand, because it has to be drawn, sooner or later

AS for D & C I think sometimes they cross the line in an "attempt to rationalise their subject", in my business we have a saying "the paralysis of analysis", i think it fits them quite well but your not in their league.

Take the verbal stick or leave, it's all the same to me, your lot have no more a monopoly of passion as you do of truth.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 06:12 PM

Events don't just have one cause, bruce. There is a whole combination of circumstances and a chain of events leading up to something like 7/7. Making out that the invasion of Iraq wasn't a major part of the events leading up to the bombings is unconvincing sophistry. I doubt very much if more than a handful of people actually believe that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 06:14 PM

carol the bombers were moslems. This is a fact. Their families have no problem agreeing with that fact.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 06:18 PM

It's not the US they hate, nor the UK, it's western liberalism

This may be true (and then again, it may not), however, the pool of available recruits, which grows ever larger with every act of aggression against Muslims by "liberal western" governments, are not thus motivated. They are becoming radicalized by the violence they see visited upon their loved ones, their countries, and their people by these very "liberal western" governments, and that is what is making them easy prey for the real extremists.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 06:31 PM

MoH said:
Making out that the invasion of Iraq wasn't a major part of the events leading up to the bombings is unconvincing sophistry

Well you may not be convinced but it certainly isn't sophistry.

I agree with you that it played a part, but, whether it played a major part is speculation ( a speciality of akenanon, but that's another story), secondly I would argue that it merely brought the attack forward in time.

There is plenty of evidence to show that these lunatics will attack anyone who doesn't agree with them anywhere, anytime.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 06:36 PM

Carol, "western liberalism" is not the same as "liberal western governments"

You need to get some quality google time in.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 07:04 PM

Shakey As far as I can see the only one digging a hole for themselves is you.
You have ignored the point made by numerous people on this thread...That Blairs policy increased the terrorist risk. and where were the terrorists in Iraq before the invasion?

We don't have to "stand up to terrorism" in other countries, there are thousands of people in the UK who could turn to terrorism to-morrow if they so wished.

Terrorism cant be defeated by military force, history tells us that, and for all your simplistic jingoism the current situation will be no different.
Of course Islamic terrorism is a scourge, but how can we stand up to it when the terrorists are our own children,and the children of our neighbours?

I still believe what I said before the war, we should pull back , stop trying to export our values to other countries.
The Islamic religion is stronger than the terrorists, and if given time and not hindered by Western interference, can absorb all the hate death and destruction.

This may not be the quick fix so beloved of the politicians and the military ,but in my opinion its our only hope...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 07:44 PM

CarolC
"you seem to be saying that all of those innocent civilians deserved to die because Saddam didn't jump when we told him to. "

No more so than you are saying they deserved to die because Bush wanted to invade-

IT IS NOT THAT THEY DESERVED TO DIE- but the responsibility is upon Saddam and those who encouraged him to defy UN resolutions for 13 years.


McGrath of Harlow -

"Events don't just have one cause, bruce. There is a whole combination of circumstances and a chain of events leading up to something like 7/7. Making out that the invasion of Iraq wasn't a major part of the events leading up to the bombings is unconvincing sophistry. "

And something I have never claimed. But to blame the US invasion of Iraq for all the evils of the world is unconvincing idiocracy.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 07:48 PM

Dear nanoo nanoo,

I'm standing here, leaning on my spade, having a fag, just wondering exactly what it is about you that makes me want to sit you on my knee and tell you a story while at the same time feel a burning desire to give your arse a kick.


I have stated a number of times that Blair's policy probably did increase the terrorist risk, at least in terms of when it would happen
I have stated a number of times that Blair's policy probably did increase the terrorist risk, at least in terms of when it would happen

No that wasn't a mistake, I'm just hoping that given enough chances to read something it might sink in.

Terrorism can't be defeated by military force. Alone.

Of course Islamic terrorism is a scourge, but how can we stand up to it when the terrorists are our own children,and the children of our neighbours

Oh, OK, let's do nothing then.

Well thankfully "our" values have spread far and wide, and, to be frank, we won't settle this completely until these same values are spread world-wide. You see, Islam is rule based,i.e. it's based on following rules, a small group of people make the rules and you follow them, not only in a religous context but in your daily life. Western liberalsim (are you listening carol) has grown out of that other scourge of mankind, christianity, but christianity was based upon individual conscience i.e. people made their own mind up about things, at least once they freed themselves from the bishop of rome, freedom to do what you want but having to answer for it later. We value our personal freedom to decide our own fate and it's been rather successful, unfortunately this deep seated idea of personal freedom has led to a situation (in the west) where we tolerate anything and evrything because we want to respect the personal freedom of others. Our greatest strength and our greatest weakness.

If we really believe in the basic truths of equality for women and across all races etc why do we (the UN) tolerate what happens in other cultures: people have human rights, groups do not.

So finally we can agree. There will be no quick fix.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 08:08 PM

Sophist Captious or fallacious reasoner, quibbler.

Or, as I'd put it, someone who doesn't really believe the arguments they are putting forward, but is going through the motions because it's their job. Which seems pretty evidently to be the situation of the representatives of the British Government on this issue.
.........................

"If we really believe in the basic truths of equality for women..." which has of course been advanced so effectively in Iraq by the invasion...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Shakey
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 08:22 PM

Just because something is unconvincing doesn't make it sophistry.


which has of course been advanced so effectively in Iraq by the invasion.

Did I say it had?

But as you brought it up, did they have the vote previously, did the women in Afganistan.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:16 PM

Ok. I'll restate...

It's not the US they hate, nor the UK, it's western liberalism

This may be true (and then again, it may not), however, the pool of available recruits, which grows ever larger with every act of aggression against Muslims by the governments of countries that practice "western liberalism", are not thus motivated. They are becoming radicalized by the violence they see visited upon their loved ones, their countries, and their people by these very governments, and that is what is making them easy prey for the real extremists.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:21 PM

IT IS NOT THAT THEY DESERVED TO DIE- but the responsibility is upon Saddam and those who encouraged him to defy UN resolutions for 13 years.

It was the responsibility of the US to exhaust all available means of resolving the problem without the use of force before resorting to the use of force. The US did not do that. Had the US been willing to do that, it would have allowed the inspectors to finish doing their job.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:30 PM

CarolC,

What part of the phrase "last chance" do you have such a problem in understanding?

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/undocs/scres/2002/res1441e.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:39 PM

The part that says that the people who were bound by the resolution (this includes the US), were required to honor Iraq's borders and sovereignty, and to allow the inspectors to do their job.

What part of "honor Iraq's borders and sovereignty" and "allow the inspectors to do their job" do you not understand? That is, after all, what the resolution required of the US, according to the wording of the resolution.

Any attempts to rationalize the use of force using the resolution is bogus. The resolution did not authorize the US to use force, and it specifically ordered the US and the other member nations to honor Iraq's borders and sovereignty. And since the inspectors were doing the job well enough to ensure that Iraq was not an imminent threat to the US (the reason given for the US invasion), the US is reponsible for the deaths of every civilian who was killed because of the US invasion and occupation, regardless of who they were killed by.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Frankham
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:42 PM

Joe you say,

"Both governments have too many honest employees who would expose that sort of conspiracy."

I'm really not sure about this. There are some who might be very afraid to expose this kind of information. The employees might be honest but they are up against the likes of Karl Rove.

It's kind of like taking on Al Capone in Chicago of the 20's. Who knows where the "hits" will fall.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:48 PM

CarolC,

We have argued this before. The UN declared Iraq in substantial default, AFTER which the US took the serious action required. You may not like it, but your comment "Any attempts to rationalize the use of force using the resolution is bogus." is obviously wrong, as the terms used in the text indicate that the UN was giving a LAST CHANCE, which Saddam failed to comply with.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 10:54 PM

The text of the UN document indicated that the UN was giving Iraq it's last chance. And that chance was to allow the inpectors to do their job. The US is in violation of that resolution specifically because it prevented the inspectors from doing their job (and because it did not honor Iraq's borders and sovereignty). You can twist the wording around to suit your preferances all you want, but that doesn't alter the FACT that the UN was the only body authorized under the terms of the resolution to take any kind of action against Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Jul 05 - 11:14 PM

Ahen...

Did anyone notice that the figure 25,000 Iraqi civilians, did not take into account the number of the newly formed Iraqi military who have died? Since these people are being targetted by the so
called, 'insurgency', don't you think that their deaths are a direct result of the U.S. invasion and their attempt to restructure the govt. in Iraq? I would think so. That puts the body count much higher. It is also noted that the recent rash of suicide bombings ups the figure considerably.

Anyway you shake it - the U.S. and its allies have killed alot of people in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:23 PM

it goes to show you[in the cases in brit land the one reposable were basicly guest of the people,even if citizen]the rabid dog will bite the hand that feeds them,best to put them down early.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 05:44 PM

Are you suggesting that all Muslims should be preemptively killed, jpk?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson's Soul
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 06:00 PM

Moslems are the terrorists of the world, and Carol C and dianavan are in denial of this.

Next bombing, please, Mohammad.

There are idiots who support you in North america and deny you are the enemy. Meet Carol C and dianavan, Mohammad.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 06:41 PM

"... did they have the vote previously, did the women in Afganistan?"

Yes. They'd had it in Iraq since 1980. In Afghanistan they had the vote from 1963, up until the fall of the Russian backed regime, and the installation of the fundamentalist warlords. But of course the people backing them didn't think this kind of thing was too important.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 06:58 PM

Right McGrath, The West was quite happy to support the terrorists against the Soviet Union.

What short memories some have..Ake

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 07:00 PM

Martin Gibson has a soul? I didn't think he existed.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 07:32 PM

Might be a spelling mistake, dianavan...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jul 05 - 10:06 PM

LOL, McG.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 05:30 PM

only if rabbid,which a few of the imam's in britland seem to be.they intend to kill you,and don't care who or what you are,just to remain in power.
truth be told;the terrorist have already won.people letting terrorist acts dictate how they live and demanding govt. to futher restrict their freedom to control terrorist.
the only way to stop it is to prevent it from starting.
the ones promoting it,do so in the intrest of their own power over others thru fear,fear of the ones doing it and the fear of those it is being done to.
kind of like giveing up rights to protect the rights you are giving up,or taking from one to give to another.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Jul 05 - 07:21 PM

Leaving out the capital letters on posts rather creates the same impression as green ink does in letters to papers; ie, that there's something up and you don't feel too curious about finding out what it is.

Of course Archy the cockroach (with the soul of a poet)had a good reason for avoiding the shift key, but what with modern keyboards that doesn't apply anymore...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 03:18 PM

As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far as a result of the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq (iraqbodycount quoted by Carol)

If I read just that one sentence quoted prominently by Carol I wonder how anyone can take them serious anymore (One might think that Carol only quotes that sentence to criticise but it looks as if she sees nothing wrong with it). They make in a blatant way one of the worst mistakes such a site can make: They mix data and interpretation in one sentence. Reading such a one-sided sentence makes me start to distrust even their data (they have explained their method but whether they have done it correctly in detail I cannot say and have to take their word for it).

The correct sentence of course would have been:
As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far since the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq

The causation is a completely different question and should not be treated cavalierly in a sentence stating the facts. Post hoc ergo propter hoc is the fallacy involved here ("I only had that accident because aunt Martha wanted me to buy her some potatoes when coming back from work"). Many different causes can be argued to have led to the present situation in Iraq. The invasion is surely prominent among the possible causes. But in the wise warning words of McGrath:

Events don't just have one cause, bruce.

One can only wonder why he only addresses Bruce here and not for instance Carol who had posted this before Bruce who was only parodying her:
ALL of the people who died in Iraq died because of the US led invasion and occupation of that country, regardless of who killed them.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 03:36 PM

The correct sentence of course would have been: As many as 10,000 non-combatant civilian deaths during 2003 have been reliably reported so far since the US/UK-led invasion and occupation of Iraq

No, this wouldn't be correct either. They are reporting on deaths that have occurred because of an act of war. Not, for instance, someone's ancient grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep (perhaps in an area that didn't have any bombs falling on it on that particular day).

One can only wonder why he only addresses Bruce here and not for instance Carol who had posted this before Bruce who was only parodying her: ALL of the people who died in Iraq died because of the US led invasion and occupation of that country, regardless of who killed them.

I saw the flaw in that sentence after I posted it. I expected that you would not pass up the opportunity to snipe at it, and clearly, I was correct. So here is my rephrasing of that sentance...

ALL of the deaths that occurred as a result of the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the US, Britain, and the "coalition", are the responsibility of the US, Britain, and the "coalition" countries, regardless of who did the killing.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 04:29 PM

When we light a fire we carry responsibility for everything that gets burnt. That doesn't mean that other people aren't responsible too, for example the fool why keeps a can of petrol in his bedroom. But joint responsibility for a tragedy doesn't in any way mean reduced responsibility for all the consequences of our own actions.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: robomatic
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 05:34 PM

WHEN we lose our beliefs we often feel as though we've lost a part of ourselves. This is true even if those beliefs are superstitions.

IN early 2001 I attended a presentation by Thomas Friedman, columnist of the New York Times who was that day the main feature of the (Alaska) Governor's Lecture Series. Ostensibly the subject was the influence of the internet and the new electronic era, but hardly half an hour into his talk he brought up Osama as a 'super empowered individual' whom the United States had targeted with dozens of cruise missile weapons. "Imagine that, a modern country at war with an individual!"

OSAMA embodies a vision, a vision of Islamic redemption from backwardness through conquest. That vision is what makes him important in this battle of global will. Despite his methods which all civilized people condemn, his appeal is international and obvious to those who look upon him as some sort of answer to a common frustration.

HE is not waging a battle for Palestinian rights, nor for the sanctity of Saudi soil. He is attempting to impose a global 'Solution' to the perceived impotence of Islamic force in the world, and by force is meant industry, philosophy, social creed, and impact on the world stage. The world of Islam, which has some historical triumphs, has been perceived, rightly or wrongly, as moribund for generations. This has been a perceived problem in the Muslim world for a long time now, the development of the State of Israel is just a symptom on which it is possible to focus. Other symptoms would be the lack of creative institutions of learning in the Arab world as opposed to the 'Western' World, the lack of industrialization, the economy based on a single natural resource sold for export, political structures which at best simulate democratic institutions, tribal loyalties which outweigh all others at the expense of a unified political state, and government sponsored religions, or more correctly, religion sponsored governments.


OSAMA'S solution is rather than emulate the West, to go back in time to an idealized Caliphate. His tactic includes terror because that is what he's capable of at this time. His weaponry is anything he can lay his hands on. The surrealism of his views is a product of isolation and great wealth. And there are many folk who share his approach, or common sickness.

FOR a modern world society to accept this view is impossible. So with these circumstances there is no hope that "we can all just get along."

THE stresses that have led to the situation with old-world Islam has a similar resonance in any 'fundamentalist-driven' worldview. There is a passing connection between the Islamic terror campaign against secularism, and the 'faith-based' proclivities of current American politics (and truth to tell, it isn't just the United States with these forces operating, it's the world).

THERE is more than one war going on: There is the religious versus secular conflict that pits Muslim cleric against Muslim free media outlet, Muslim terrorist against Muslim policeman, Muslim suicide bomber against resort hotel (Muslim or otherwise). There is also a war of religion against religion: Christian fundy against Muslim fundy. The first war is inevitable. The second war detracts from the first war and will lead to chaos and old night.

Jed Marum's assessment of Osama on 08 July was perceptive, likewise Ladyjean's clever poetic reworking, which said in a nutshell what I'm posting here.

I have my own poets to add:

From the era in which the Christian world first had to face up to changing perceptions.

FROM Nosce Teipsum (1599)
by Sir John Davies
. . .

I know my body's of so frail a kind
As force without, fevers within, can kill;
I know the heavenly nature of my nind,
But 'tis corrupted both in wit and will;

I know my soul hath power to know all things,
Yet is she blind and ignorant of all;
I know I am one of nature's little kings,
Yet to the least and vilest things am thrall.

I know my life's a pain and but a span,
I know my sense is mocked with everything;
And to conclude, I know myself a man,
Which is a proud and yet a wretched thing.

FROM "Anatomy Of The World" (1621)
by John Donne
...
And new philosophy calls all in doubt,
The element of fire is quite put out,
The sun is lost, and th'earth, and no man's wit
Can well direct him where to look for it.
And freely men confess that this world's spent,
When in the planets and the firmament
They seek so many new; they see that this
Is crumbled out again to his atomies.
'Tis all in pieces, all coherence gone,
All just supply, and all relation;
Prince, subject, father, son, are things forgot...

AS of now, we are in the middle of the technical social revolution ushered in three generations ago with atomic engineering. We are all entering the latest phase of the new era, highly techological, with genetics enabling an acclerated re-working of every aspect of humankind from what we wear, what we eat, to how we live and who and what we are.

It makes sense to be afraid of the issues therein. One of the common reactions is to seek refuge in the imagined surety of an earlier era. This is going on everywhere. Osama is the outer bounds of that reaction. He can no more succeed than we can undo the Trinity Test of July 1945, than Adam and Eve can disgorge the apple.

The only reaction which will actually save us is to "boldly go" forward, realizing that not everything we were taught to believe in was correct, that it couldn't all be correct, but we now living are the carriers to the future, and if nothing else, we should be carrying a book of poems.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 05:49 PM

Where is Peter Woodruff?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 05:59 PM

I think he's in Maine.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 06:08 PM

I agree with every word of that, Robomatic. And I would add that in this country, the refusal or inability of the fundamentalists to recognize that they are trying to create a theocracy is one of the walls we keep thwacking into.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 06:56 PM

I don't think I do agree with all of it. Islam was, for a time, more in the background of the countries in which it was the major religion... more like a backdrop of religious culture behind the struggle of the people in the Middle East to try to gain the same kind of self determination that the industrializing countries had already accomplished. This was being thwarted on all sides by major powers of the West such as Britain, France, and ultimately, the US.

We have no way of knowing how the countries of the Middle East would have progressed had they not been interfered with to the degree that they were. Iran does, however, give us some idea of how they might have developed, since it did, for a short time, have a fledgling democracy. That was stopped in its tracks by outside forces (powerful countries of the West). The sense of frustration that the people of the Middle East feel is probably far more a product of never having the chance to determine their own destiny (with the rejuvenation of the Muslim religion that would inevitably have accompanied it... as has happened with the other world's major religions as they have progressed in self determination during the modern era).

It should not be surprising that the Muslim religion as it is found in the Middle East would be lagging behind Islam as found in liberal democratic countries, and the other major religions as they are found in liberal democratic countries. The people and countries of that region have been interfered with too much to have had a chance to find their place in the developed world. And now, extremist Islam is being embraced as a way to accomplish what could not be accomplished through other means. Self determination.

Yes, Osama probably does not have that as his motivator... his motivator is probably more a sort of beatific madness. But that is what Muslims are increasingly turning to extremism in order to get, and the motivator that people like Osama are using to manipulate people into doing their bidding.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 07:11 PM

We have no way of knowing how the countries of the Middle East would have progressed had they not been interfered with to the degree that they were. Iran does, however, give us some idea of how they might have developed, since it did, for a short time, have a fledgling democracy. That was stopped in its tracks by outside forces (powerful countries of the West).


(ABOVE SHOULD BE ITALICIZED, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE FUNCTION FOR THAT)

Above---Carol C. and some of her--once again-- impartial, intelligent, and fair minded comments.

OOPS---our fault again. OH those terrible Western nations. Thanks to their hope for self preservation and that of their citizenry they now have to over-react to suspects---read into tht the London tragedy of a few days ago. But---honesty by this terrible western nation in announcing the truth and the apology. I am sure I missed such comments from Carol Cs idols---the moderates in the Middle East who have been so corrupted by those nasty nasy westerners.

Perhaps she should self flagelate a few times a year as they do. Makes for more bonding.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 07:16 PM

It wasn't corruption by Westerners. It was a CIA backed coup that eliminated the democratically elected government, and installed in its place, the Shah (a dictator just like Saddam).

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 07:27 PM

And if you've never heard of that crucial episode, Bill p-0 and your comment there rather suggests that you haven't - just type "Mossadeq" into Google, and read all about it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 07:28 PM

And if you've never heard of that crucial episode, Bill - and your comment there rather suggests that you haven't - just type "Mossadeq" into Google, and read all about it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 07:46 PM

Jeeze why doesn't she go and fight for the cause she supports?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:01 PM

If you are referring to me, GUEST, 24 Jul 05 - 07:46 PM, the cause I support is freedom and democracy here in the US. And then I support US foreign policy that does not harm other countries and peoples. Firstly, because that is what is right, and secondly, that is ultimately what is good for freedom and democracy here in the US. This is my responsibility as a US citizen, taxpayer, and voter.

So I already am fighting for the cause I support.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:06 PM

Yes---I do know of the Mossadegh business. Tragic. We are surely not saints. Same mistake as we made in backing Sadam. Yet there are the gray areas that no one wants to even admit exist.

Sadly, we can go into space in a joint effort and we cannot find commong ground here on Earth.   So---in the end--and, again, sadly, it comes down to self preservation---be it from a Hitler, a Stalin, a fanatic---of any ilk (Muslim, Christian, etc;).

So--as far as this thread is concerned---Guest--above---may have the right comment for Carol and her ilk.   I like that "ilk"---

You know, Carol, like your favorite radio host---he is of an "ilk" too. So great to have you as a devoted fan---loved her comments earlier---so intelligent and so subtle. Erudition personified.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:14 PM

Sorry Carol C, McGrath but your 'facts' are shakey, as usual.

No, Mossadeq was not elected. He was appointed prime minister by The Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi.

The Pahlavi line has an ancient and legitimate claim to rule Iran.

The Shah became ruler of Persia (later called Iran) in 1941. The eviction of his Mossadeq was in 1953.

The CIA and British intelligence Service were asked, by the Shah, to help protect the royal family and to restore his rightful place on what was sometimes called "The Peacock Throne"


The following is not in my words and is reproduced without permission:

MOSSADEQ AND OIL NATIONALIZATION

From 1949 on, sentiment for nationalization of Iran's oil industry grew. In 1949 the Majlis approved the First Development Plan (1948-55), which called for comprehensive agricultural and industrial development of the country. The Plan Organization was established to administer the program, which was to be financed in large part from oil revenues. Politically conscious Iranians were aware, however, that the British government derived more revenue from taxing the concessionaire, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC--formerly the Anglo-Persian Oil Company), than the Iranian government derived from royalties. The oil issue figured prominently inelections for the Majlis in 1949, and nationalists in the new Majlis were determined to renegotiate the AIOC agreement. In November 1950, the Majlis committee concerned with oil matters, headed by Mossadeq, rejected a draft agreement in which the AIOC had offered the government slightly improved terms. These terms did not include the fifty-fifty profit-sharing provision that was part of other new Persian Gulf oil concessions.

Subsequent negotiations with the AIOC were unsuccessful, partly because General Ali Razmara, who became prime minister in June 1950, failed to persuade the oil company of the strength of nationalist feeling in the country and in the Majlis. When the AIOC finally offered fifty-fifty profit-sharing in February 1951, sentiment for nationalization of the oil industry had become widespread. Razmara advised against nationalization on technical grounds and was assassinated in March 1951 by Khalil Tahmasebi, a member of the militant Fadayan-e Islam. On March 15, the Majlis voted to nationalize the oil industry. In April the shah yielded to Majlis pressure and demonstrations in the streets by naming Mossadeq prime minister.

Oil production came to a virtual standstill as British technicians left the country, and Britain imposed a worldwide embargo on the purchase of Iranian oil. In September 1951, Britain froze Iran's sterling assets and banned export of goods to Iran. It challenged the legality of the oil nationalization and took its case against Iran to the International Court of Justice at The Hague. The court found in Iran's favor, but the dispute between Iran and the AIOC remained unsettled. Under United States pressure, the AIOC improved its offer to Iran. The excitement generated by the nationalization issue, anti-British feeling, agitation by radical elements, and the conviction among Mossadeq's advisers that Iran's maximum demands would, in the end, be met, however, led the government to reject all offers. The economy began to suffer from the loss of foreign exchange and oil revenues.

Meanwhile, Mossadeq's growing popularity and power led to political chaos and eventual United States intervention. Mossadeq had come to office on the strength of support from the National Front and other parties in the Majlis and as a result of his great popularity. His popularity, growing power, and intransigence on the oil issue were creating friction between the prime minister and the shah. In the summer of 1952, the shah refused the prime minister's demand for the power to appoint the minister of war (and, by implication, to control the armed forces). Mossadeq resigned, three days of pro-Mossadeq rioting followed, and the shah was forced to reappoint Mossadeq to head the government.

As domestic conditions deteriorated, however, Mossadeq's populist style grew more autocratic. In August 1952, the Majlis acceded to his demand for full powers in all affairs of government for a six-month period. These special powers were subsequently extended for a further six-month term. He also obtained approval for a law to reduce, from six years to two years, the term of the Senate (established in 1950 as the upper house of the Majlis), and thus brought about the dissolution of that body. Mossadeq's support in the lower house of the Majlis (also called the Majlis) was dwindling, however, so on August 3, 1953, the prime minister organized a plebiscite for the dissolution of the Majlis, claimed a massive vote in favor of the proposal, and dissolved thelegislative body.

The administration of President Harry S Truman initially had been sympathetic to Iran's nationalist aspirations. Under the administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, however, the United States came to accept the view of the British government that no reasonable compromise with Mossadeq was possible and that, by working with the Tudeh, Mossadeq was making probable a communist-inspired takeover. Mossadeq's intransigence and inclination to accept Tudeh support, the Cold War atmosphere, and the fear of Soviet influence in Iran also shaped United States thinking. In June 1953, the Eisenhower administration approved a British proposal for a joint Anglo-American operation, code-named Operation Ajax, to overthrow Mossadeq. Kermit Roosevelt of the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) traveled secretly to Iran to coordinate plans with the shah and the Iranian military, which was led by General Fazlollah Zahedi.

In accord with the plan, on August 13 the shah appointed Zahedi prime minister to replace Mossadeq. Mossadeq refused to step down and arrested the shah's emissary. This triggered the second stage of Operation Ajax, which called for a military coup. The plan initially seemed to havefailed, the shah fled the country, and Zahedi went into hiding. After four days of rioting, however, the tide turned. On August 19, pro-shah army units and street crowds defeated Mossadeq's forces. The shah returned to the country. Mossadeq was sentenced to three years' imprisonment for trying to overthrow the monarchy, but he was subsequently allowed to remain under house arrest in his village outside Tehran until his death in 1967. His minister of foreign affairs, Hosain Fatemi, was sentenced to death and executed. Hundreds of National Front leaders, Tudeh Party officers, and political activists were arrested; several Tudeh army officers were also sentenced to death.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:25 PM

Here are some key points to look at in the article:

       "Razmara advised against nationalization on technical grounds and was assassinated in March 1951 by Khalil Tahmasebi, a member of the militant Fadayan-e Islam."

Yep, extremists were murdering reasonable moderates even then.

       "Mossadeq refused to step down and arrested the shah's emissary."

Reza Pahlavi was the legitimate king, widely loved and respected by his people. A prime minister, appointed by the king, does not arrest the king's emissary without dire conequences.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 24 Jul 05 - 08:42 PM

Which brings us back to what I had said earlier. Things are always fluid---politics and the world changes as the ocean rolls on. Right or wrong we do our best for the survival of our way of living.

It is those people who do not appreciate what they have that will then allow themselves to be engulfed by the views of those poor alleged unfortunates that are bent on destroying (killing) you.

If we were all saintly there would be no problem. We are not. They are not. Therein is the problem---We--They.

Without going into the specifics since we have re-hashed them many times and gone way off the London 9/11 subject header let me just say that the Mosadegh situation was just another piece of the ongoing things I mentioned earlier.   He was not truly elected---it was a time of Communist turmoil---and we can see the historical consequences of what transpired. Right--wrong?   In hindsight we are all brilliant.   He was no saint--not was the Shah--nor what followed---so we are back to self preservation. And hopefully, some ethical underpinings.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 12:37 AM

I'm having some difficulty tracking down the source of the material you posted, pdq. You yourself have not cited a source. Here is a cached version...

G o o g l e's cache of http://www.kalabhavanshow.info/world_ref/2of3/ir0025.htm

This is the site that appears to have been the cached version's host (the page no longer exists)...

http://www.kalabhavanshow.com

This is what Wikipedia has to say about Reza Shah Pahlavi, father of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (who was the Shah during the time of Mohammed Mossadegh)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reza_Pahlavi_of_Iran

"Reza Shah Pahlavi (Persian: رضا پهلوی), (March 16, 1877�July 26, 1944), also known as Reza Shah the Great, was Shah of Persia from 1925 until 1935 and Shah of Iran (as the country was renamed to Iran, the name which had always been used by its people) from 1935 until 1941.

On February 21, 1921, Reza Khan Mirpanj (رضا خان میرپنج), as was then his name and rank, staged a coup d'etat together with Seyyed Zia'eddin Tabatabaee, who became the prime minister. He was a military commander who had risen from the ranks to command the Russian trained Cossack Brigade, becoming known as Reza Khan Sardar Sepah (رضا خان سردار سپه). He later became the Minister of War, in April 1921. Ahmad Shah Qajar finally named him Prime Minister on October 26, 1923, and left for Europe. The National Assembly deposed the Ghajar Dynasty in 1925 and Reza Khan's rule was formalized when he was proclaimed Shah by a constituent assembly on December 12, 1925. He took his imperial oath on December 15, 1925 and so became the first Shah of the Pahlavi dynasty.

Out of his marriage with Taj al Molouk (1896�1982) his son and successor Mohammad Reza Pahlavi of Iran was born."


* Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was only the second member of his family to be the Shah, and as you can see, his family gained this position illegitmately through a coup. *


Mohammed Mossadegh, on the other hand, was legitimately elected to parliment...

"By 1944 Reza Pahlavi had abdicated, and Mossadegh was once again elected to parliament. This time he ran as a member of the National Front of Iran (Jebhe Melli), a nationalist organization which he had founded that aimed to end the foreign presence that had established itself in Iran following the Second World War, especially regarding the exploitation of Iran's rich oil resources."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_Mossadeq


...and once again, we see that it is all about oil (or whatever natural resources belonging to others that the powerful countries of the West had in mind to appropriate).


And then he was elected as prime minister, and the Shah, having no other choice, rubber-stamped the vote...

"A while later, the Majlis voted for Mossadegh as new prime minister. Aware of Mossadegh's rising popularity and political power, the young Shah was left with no other option but to give assent to the Parliament's vote."


And when Mossedegh took steps to ensure that the Iranians would be the primary beneficiaries of the oil revenues of that country, Britain did everything in its power to prevent them from doing so (stuck it to them up the behind, so to speak)...

"Shortly after coming to office, Mossadegh enforced the Oil Nationalization Act, which involved the expropriation of the AIOC's assets.

Responding to the latter, the British government announced it would not allow Mossadegh's government to export any oil produced in the formerly British-controlled factories. A blockade of British ships was sent to the Persian Gulf to prevent any attempts by Iran to ship any oil out of the country. An economic stalemate thus ensued, with Mossadegh's government refusing to allow any British involvement in Iran's oil industry, and Britain refusing to allow any oil to leave Iran.

Since Britain had long been Iran's primary oil-consumer, the stalemate was particularly hard on Iran. While the country had once boasted over a 100 million dollars a year in exports to Britain, after nationalization, the same oil industry began increasing Iran's debt by nearly 10 million dollars a month. The Abadan Crisis quickly plunged the country into economic difficulties."


But this didn't prevent Mossadegh from being elected prime minister a second time...

"Despite the economic hardships of his nationalization plan, Mossadegh remained popular, and in 1952 was approved by parliament for a second term."


The CIA backed coup that removed Mossadegh from power was all about pretty much the same thing as the recent US invasion of Iraq... money and oil. It was most certainly not about restoring a legitimate government to power.

This is about some information contained in some CIA documents that have been made public...

"The CIA described the coup plan as 'quasi-legal,' referring to the fact that the shah legally dismissed Mossadeq but presumably acknowledging that he did not do so on his own initiative. These documents make clear that the CIA was prepared to go forward with the coup even if the shah opposed it."

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:21 AM

The overthrow of Mossadegh by a CIA sponsored coup is recounted quite clearly and interestingly in a book that came out on the 50th anniversary of the events, "All The Shah's Men" by Kinzer. I just finished it.

Briefly, it was an era when England was still of the colonial frame of mind. To the leadership's point of view, the huge oil deposits had been discovered, developed, and run by English enterprise. The Persians were lucky to get anything at all and were ungrateful. The English were able to manipulate the Persian leaders so that they essentially served at English pleasure.

Mossadegh for his part was a brilliant and eccentric leader of his people, quite popular. He had the unfortunate disposition to be unwilling to compromise when powers much greater than his had their backs to the wall.

According to Kinzer, Truman and the US State Department were eager to arrange a compromise. They found the English colonialist and unsympathetic, and Mossadegh sympathetic but unrealistic. The next US administration, Eisenhower's, was at first of a similar opinion to Truman's, but the Churchill administration recast the threat as not economic, but political. They convinced the US that Iran would fall under Soviet influence.

The coup itself was a masterpiece of happenstance. The CIA organizer was a grandosn of President Theodore Roosevelt, and after it was over, he briefed the American President and the heads of CIA and State, the Dulles brothers. Supposedly he tried to emphasize that overthrowing regimes should not be a common policy, but the US derived the opposite lesson from this, and went merrily on its way to Guatemala.

Anyhow, it's an interesting book.

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

Regarding how we'll never know what that part of the world would be like without Western interference, so what? We deal with the world as it is. That part of the world is at an earlier stage of development, and is being forced into modernity at a rate heretofore unknown. Islam is 600 years younger than Christianity, and Christianity has only recently evolved into accepting the secular/ religious wall of separation (and this is still being argued).

The point of including the poems of Davies and Donne was to emphasize how some very great writers reacted to the age of reason. Most of Europe was dragged kicking and screaming through that period and there was plenty of state on state and state within state violence, of a degree and savagery not yet duplicated by a long shot. In other words, Osama, bad as he is, is a piker compared to the Inquisition. Let's hope he stays that way.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:39 AM

The point of drawing in history isn't to battle once again over the past, as if it was possible to change it, but rather to help put the present in proportion, so we appreciate it isn't as clearcut as it's presented to us.

And also, very often, to remind us that when we "solve" immediate problems in a realkpolitik way, disregarding the kind of ethical principles we claim to have, there is loable to be a very heavy price indeed to be paid for it a few years down the line.

It seems to me that just about every moral/political disaster of the past century, from the Holocaust on down, can be laid at the door of some decision a few years earlier to cut corners and solve some immediately pressing problem that is often now forgotten.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: robomatic
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 06:44 AM

I think that anything that we judge in hindsight is subject to reinterpretation to the extent that it loses all meaning.

Consider a quote by that paragon of history who I know you all love - (not):

"I beseech you, by the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken."
- Oliver Cromwell


And another:

"History doesn't repeat itself - at best sometimes it rhymes."
- Mark Twain

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:54 AM

I might, just might, be able to proud to call myself left wing once more.

Read and learn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:23 AM

GUEST, Shakey...thanks for your recent hard work here at Mudcat. You appear to be one who looks for The Truth.

Here is a statement I copied from your link above. It supports my contention that The Left seldom offers solutions to problems, and if they do, those plans seldom work.

From GUEST, Shakey's link, coppied without permission:

" Peter Tatchell (Human Rights campaigner, London)

We are witnessing one of the greatest betrayals by the left since so-called left-wingers backed the Hitler-Stalin pact and opposed the war against Nazi fascism. Today, the pseudo-left reveals its shameless hypocrisy and its wholesale abandonment of humanitarian values. While it deplores the 7/7 terrorist attack on London, only last year it welcomed to the UK the Muslim cleric, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who endorses the suicide bombing of innocent civilians. These same right-wing leftists back the so-called 'resistance' in Iraq. This 'resistance' uses terrorism against civilians as its modus operandi - stooping to the massacre of dozens of Iraqi children in order kill a few US soldiers. Terrorism is not socialism; it is the tactic of fascism. But much of the left doesn't care. Never mind what the Iraqi people want, it wants the US and UK out of Iraq at any price, including the abandonment of Iraqi socialists, trade unionists, democrats and feminists. If the fake left gets its way, the ex-Baathists and Islamic fundamentalists could easily seize power, leading to Iranian-style clerical fascism and a bloodbath. I used to be proud to call myself a leftist. Now I feel shame. Much of the left no longer stands for the values of universal human rights and international socialism."

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:42 AM

You don't get the regieme change you want you get the regieme change you have.

What IF the Mosques that have been bombed by the CIA since the Reagan administration actually killed the people they were aiming for.

so what

robomatic you can take your military solutions and go study war for the rest of your life and you will forever miss the point.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 10:39 AM

...for CarolC, et al, here is more about the Pahlavi monarchy:


"The Pahlavi Era of Iran

In 1976, Iran celebrated the Golden Jubilee of the Pahlavi dynasty, a year-long festival in which the nation looked back on one of the most glorious and prosperous periods of its long and dramatic history.

On 25th April, 1926, the Pahlavi era officially began. Symbolically placing the crown on his head with his own hands, Reza Shah the Great forrnally ended a sad period of national weakness and humiliation and ushered in a new age. The events leading up to this transformation began five vears earlier. On February 22nd, 1921, Reza Khan Mir Panj, as he then was called staged a coup d'état. A military commander of exceptional genius, he had risen from the ranks to command the Cossack Division, the country's, only efficient military force.

Marching his troops from Qazvin, 150 kilometres to the west of Teheran, General Reza Khan seized key parts of the capital almost without opposition and forced the weak and inefficient government of the day to resign. His first post was as army commander, which he later combined with the post of Minister of War, taking at the same time the title Sardar Sepah. Until 1923 there were civilian prime ministers, but the future monarch soon realized that to carry out his task of national salvation he needed wider powers. In 1923 he became Prime Minister, and soon afterwards Ahmad Shah Qajar left for Europe, never to return. On 12th December, 1925, the Majlis, convening as a constituent assembly, voted to vest the crown of Iran "in the person of His Majesty the Shahanshah, Reza Shah Pahlavi... and in his male progeny generation after generation". The following April the formal Coronation took place, and at the same ceremony Mohammad Reza, Reza Shah's eldest son, was proclaimed Crown Prince.

Reza Shah had already undertaken the momentous task of unifying the country, extending the power of the central government and instituting a series of administrative reforms. These tasks completed, he then embarked on the creation of a modern economic infrastructure, building roads and railways, power stations and factories. When Iran became embroiled against its will in the events of World War II, this great monarch's plans were still far from fully implemented, but the foundations of modern Iran, on which today's impressive edifice has been built, had been securely laid till 1979.

In the summer of 1941 the German invasion of the Soviet Union caused the Allies great anxiety, as there was now no safe route to supply the Russians with desperately needed arms. Disregarding Iranian neutrality, Britain and the Soviet Union sent ultimatums to Iran regarding the presence of German nationals in Iran, whom they considered a threat to the security of the vital southern oil industry, and on August 25th invaded Iran from the south, west and north. Shortly afterwards Reza Shah abdicated in favour of his Crown Prince and left the country for exile, first to Mauritius, then to Johannesburg, where he died three years later in bitter sadness.

It was not easy for the young Shah to reign over a country occupied by foreign troops, with his father, the founder of modern Iran, and the greatest influence on his life, abroad. But those dark days were not entirely wasted and the Shah began to develop his skills as a diplomat and statesman. Although Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill were preoccupied with post-War European problems when they met a the Teheran Conference in 1943, the Shah succeeded in obtaining guarantees that their troops would be withdrawn from Iran after hostilities ended and full compensation paid for the use of Iran as a supply route. This was never done by the victorious allies.

Iran in fact became known to the Allies as the "Bridge of Victory", across which immense quantities of arms and other supplies were delivered to the Soviet Union, thus facilitating the ultimate Allied victory. Meanwhile, Iran's development plans came to a complete' halt and the country was racked by famine, insecurity, economic stagnation and galloping inflation.

After the War, Stalin reneged on his promise to withdraw Soviet troops. Instead he used them to support secessionist regimes in Azarbaijan and Kurdestan. When Iranian public opinion, backed by international diplomacy and United Nations pressure, forced the Red Army to withdraw, Iranian forces under the command of the Shah marched to these north-west provinces, and in December, 1946, the secessionist movements abruptly collapsed.

Political instability continued in Tehran, however, and the government of Dr. Mossadegh, a nationalist Iranian to be sure, became embroiled with the still all-powerful Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Efforts to create a new and vigorous society where blocked. because of continuous quarrels with Britain over the nationalization of our oil industry. This period of tension and instability ended in 1953. Much of Iran still remained firmly in the grip of absentee feudal landlords, determined to keep the rural population in ignorance and economic serfdom, while in the towns industrial workers were often exploited, and corruption in government circles was rampant.

After a number of disappointments in attempting to implement reforms through parliamentary procedures, which were always blocked by vested interests in the Majlis, the Shah decided to take more positive action. Interpreting his oath of office in its fullest sense, the Shah, after deep consideration, announced the first six points of a revolutionary charter, and on January 26th, 1963, the Nation gave its resounding approval in a referendum in which more than five million persons voted. Thus, in the most democratic way possible, the Revolution of the Shah and the People, as this unprecedented social and economic transformation was called, became an accomplished fact.

Since that time, Iran went from strength to strength. The White Revolution put the finishing touches to the pioneer work of modernizing the country which Reza Shah had begun. A review of this continuous program of reform that underwent considerable development since 1963, are given in the next chapter "The Revolution of the Shah and the Nation." As for the results, and the benefits that the Iranian nation has enjoyed during the first half-century of Pahlavi rule, the rest of this Internet survey is devoted to outlining the most significant of these achievements, which amounted to a total transformation of Iran from a backward and poverty stricken country into a peaceful, dynamic and influential nation."


Note: modernization in much of the Middle East came to a grinding hault due to the incompetence of Jimmy Carter. He scolded our allies about 'human rights' while giving Islamists a free pass. Result, in 1979 we got dictator/thug Saddam Hussein in Iraq and a repressive Islamic theocracy in Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: average american
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 02:47 PM

pdq: you haven't really said anything. You've parrotted some trash talk against 'leftists' which blatently smears 'em all with the same brush. It's no different than if someone named qdp suggested that all rightists were Lindbergh quoting fifth columnists who marched in common goose step.
Your unattributed quote on 'The Pahlavi' era is a blatent paen of praise for the two shahs and their short lived 'dynasty'. They served at British pleasure and in fact the British told Shah Reza to take a hike in the middle of the war when he showed too much favoritism to German Nationalism (the Nazis). His son didn't assume power without substantial covert aid from England and the US.

Check out the Kinzer book, "All The Shah's Men" as I mentioned in an earlier posting.


Now as for Hakman - Donuel, who wrote:
robomatic you can take your military solutions and go study war for the rest of your life and you will forever miss the point.

This has nothing to do with anything I have written in this thread. If you bothered to read my posts you might come up with something more to the point.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 03:02 PM

Regarding how we'll never know what that part of the world would be like without Western interference, so what?

So nothing, if we don't engage in the kind of speculation that you were engaging in in your 24 Jul 05 - 05:34 PM post. Such speculation serves no useful purpose, and only tends to promote the stereotyps that are an all to common part of our daily discourse these days, and that do, ultimately, get used to justify treating Muslims and people from the Middle East as less than human, or as lesser humans. We are not in a position to judge them because of where they are now, since we contributed greatly to that particular state of affairs.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 03:03 PM

Here are some key statements from my last post:

       "After the War, Stalin reneged on his promise to withdraw Soviet troops. Instead he used them to support secessionist regimes in Azarbaijan and Kurdestan. When Iranian public opinion, backed by international diplomacy and United Nations pressure, forced the Red Army to withdraw, Iranian forces under the command of the Shah marched to these north-west provinces, and in December, 1946, the secessionist movements abruptly collapsed.

Political instability continued in Tehran, however, and the government of Dr. Mossadegh, a nationalist Iranian to be sure, became embroiled with the still all-powerful Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Efforts to create a new and vigorous society where blocked. because of continuous quarrels with Britain over the nationalization of our oil industry. This period of tension and instability ended in 1953."

Yep, once again the pesky Commies in Russia had a hand in the instability, wanting oil-rich Iran in their sphere of influence.

aa- I have read part of Kinzer's book and it is vomit.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:01 PM

More unattributed propaganda, I see, pdq.

Here are the two sites I was able to find for what you put in your 25 Jul 05 - 10:39 AM post...

Long Live The Shah

http://www.sedona.net/pahlavi/content.html


If we're going to go down that partucular road, let's try this one on for size...

The Biography of Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh

"- Dr. Mossadegh was elected to the Parliament from Tehran, and it was during this period that the Qajar dynasty was overthrown and Reza khan declared himself the King of Iran. Mossadegh strongly criticized the Kingship of Reza khan, and when the sixth Majlis ended, and Reza Khan became the absolute dictator of Iran, Mossadegh was forced to stay at home for many years. During the last years of Reza Shah's reign, when most of the political figures were either deceased or had surrendered to the Pahlavi regime, Mossadegh was arrested and exiled for several months, but finally he was sent back to his Ahmad Abad country estate under house arrest. After the occupation of Iran by the British and Russian armies in 1941, Reza Shah was forced to abdicate and exiled to South Africa until his death, and Mossadegh returned to Tehran...

... - The people of Iran who were angered by Mossadegh's dismissal, revolted in favor of him and Ayatollah Kashani (who was a close ally of Mossadegh at that time), and against the new government and the Shah. After 4 days of bloody revolt, the people defeated the Ghavam's government and the shah's army, and once again Mossadegh became Prime Minister...

... - By controlling the Defense Ministry (previous War Ministry), Mossadegh succeeded in cleaning the army from corrupted officers, and this act angered the Royal Court.

    - In March of 1953, the Royal Court with the help of a group of clergies, expelled army officers, and ruffians, decided to perform a conspiracy plan against Dr. Mossadegh. The plan was that on the first day of March, the Shah would leave the capital for Europe and pretend that Mossadegh had forced him to leave the country. On the other hand the ruffians and expelled army officers would gather in front of the Royal Palace to avoid the Shah's departure. At the same time when Mossadegh comes out of the Royal Palace, they would attack and murder him. But since Mossadegh suspected the conspiracy at the last moment, he escaped the scene.

    - General Afshar-Toos, the loyal police chief of Mossadegh's government, was brutally murdered by the Royal Court's agents and the expelled officers.

    - Because of the continues disputes between the Parliament and the cabinet, and following the Majlis member's abdications, Mossadegh declared a national referendum to let the people choose between dissolvement of the Parliament, or cabinet's abdication. In this referendum (which was criticized by many figures, because of the separation of the Yes and No ballot boxes, and not being held at a same time in Tehran and other cities), the majority of the votes were for dissolvement of the Majlis, and it was dissolved in August of 1953.

    - On August 16, 1953, with accordance to an American-British designed plan, the Shah issued Dr. Mossadegh's dismissal, and the chief of the Royal Guards carried the formal notice to Mossadegh's house (which was also his Prime Ministry office) and was ordered to occupy the house by the Royal troops. But when the troops reached the Mossadegh's house, Mossadegh's guards immediately arrested the Royal Guard's chief and his troops. The coup was publicized and the Shah escaped the country for Italy.

    - On 17th and 18th of August 1953, people poured to the streets in support of Mossadegh and the status of Mohammad Reza and Reza Shah were pulled down all over the country.

    - On August 19, 1953, the intelligence services of U.S.A. and Britain (CIA - MI6), enforced a more precise and expensive coup d'etat plan, and this time succeeded in overthrowing Mossadegh's government. On this day, after bribing some of the grand Ayatollahs, army officers, ruffians, and the prostitutes, the coup makers pulled large mobs into the streets to demonstrate against the national government of Dr. Mossadegh. Because of the police chief treachery, the coup makers reached the house of the Prime Minister and after several hours of bombarding the house and bloody battle with the small group of Mossadegh's loyal guards, they entered the house and after plundering it, they burned the house."

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:09 PM

Thread drift extraordinaire

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:33 PM

Quite true, GUEST, but one cannot let CarolC's 'fact-opinions' go unchallenged.

CarolC...compare the two stories of the same events and you will see how propaganda works. In your posts, the US and Britain are always wrong. I say, most politely, that is not so.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:46 PM

Your first and second were propaganda. My second was propaganda. But I think it's pretty difficult to argue with declassified CIA documents, and I tend to see Wikipedia as a more reliable (although not infallible) source of information than the unattributed material that has no known source (as in your first link), and sites that exist specifically for the purpose of glorifying the Shah.

The US and Britain are responsible. As is was the Soviet Union while it still existed.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 04:52 PM

P.S. I wouldn't say that the US and Britain are always wrong (although they usually are). The way I would tend to put it is that the US and Britain almost always have a self-serving hidden agenda that is pursued at the expense of the civilians of many countries less powerful than them. (And this is what makes them wrong... because it is wrong to kill people and/or subjugate them for money/oil/power, etc.)

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Peter Woodruff
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:20 PM

Dear Guest,
   You got it right! "Thread drift extraordinaire."

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 05:42 PM

seem to me carol, that they say persia and the diff peoples of that area where the center of the world long ago,they fell and lost it carol.
had it befor mohammed,lost it after they found him.hmmmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 07:51 PM

I need to correct this (or Wolfgang will do it for me)...

Your first and second were propaganda. My second was propaganda.

It should read...

Your first and second were propaganda. The biography of Mossadegh that I provided a link to in my 25 Jul 05 - 04:01 PM post was propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 08:58 PM

pdq: I read the book by Kinzer and would like you to supply more than 'vomit' as a reaction to it. He was a NYT correspondent and the book appared to be researched and quite definitive. On the other hand, your glistening review of the military dictators called the Shahs runs counter to every secular Iranian I've ever met, and I met a lot of them in school.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 09:19 PM

So let me see now---the thread is London and the tragedy inflicted by the "terrorists"---though the term may not be proper for Carol C and her cohorts. But now we are into Mossadegh, Israel, ---you name it.

So--Carol---are you a "hijacker" or not? thankfully not of airliners only threads that end up as ---your term--propoganda---aka Bullshit.

All in the eye of the beholder---you behold logic---I behold propoganda and Bullshit. You behold intransigence and narrowness on my part---and I of you.. So--you see---we agree. We both think the other is just spouting Bullshit---oh, sorry---you call it propoganda when you disagree.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Jul 05 - 11:52 PM

I'll grant your consistency, Bill Hahn, but it's still misspelt. I saw it as 'poopooganda'. If the shoe don't pinch...

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 05:35 AM

It is very easy to throw out allegations and comments without checking up on whether these are actually in accordance with the evidence, and some people do it constantly, even when it would only take a couple of seconds to check.

When we make some factual assertion about some issue which is relatively obscure, or subject to controversy, it is elementary good manners to provide links to sources.

And yet when Carol does that she is repeatedly attacked and insulted as if doing that kind of thing was a mark of obsession and imbalance. I wish that some of the people who lay into her would take a bit more care to check up on their facts, and to indicate their sources.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:47 AM

non-combatant civilian deaths

can include according to Carol

someone's ancient grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep.

Interesting. Each day I learn something new in English.

Carol,

I never would have bothered with your or Bearded Bruce's way of expressing the causes of the deaths in Iraq. McGrath of Harlow's (or should it be McGrath's of Harlow?) one-eyed selectivity in when or whom he criticises in these threads was my target. In particular, since the two sentences were so close to each other in form and time. His critique of such sentences is of course correct.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:52 AM

non-combatant civilian deaths

can include according to Carol

someone's ancient grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep.

Interesting. Each day I learn something new in English.

Combined with...

If I read just that one sentence quoted prominently by Carol I wonder how anyone can take them serious anymore

Seems to be the crux of your inability to converse coherently in English, Wolfgang. The idea is to take things IN context rather than out of them. For instance, my advice to you would be to not read just that one sentance, but to read the whole article or page in which the sentance is found.

"Wolfgang has no brain"

...means something entirely different than...

"Wolfgang has no brain samples from monkeys in his lab"

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 11:58 AM

argumentum ad hominem instead discussing the issue.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 12:07 PM

Not really, Wolfgang. The issue is you going around correcting people all the time, and then turning out to be wrong yourself, as I have just demonstrated.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: pdq
Date: 26 Jul 05 - 08:39 PM

While Mudcat was down, I picked out a few quotes. They are absolutely not aimed at any individual.

From Branch Rickey, Dodgers general manager who broke baseball's color barrier:

                He that will not reason is a bigot.
             He that cannot reason is a fool.
             He that dares not reason is a slave.

From me, I suppose:

             Back in the '60s, people often used the term 'heavy'. I once suggested that

                   "Sometimes 'heavy' just means that you've overlaoded your wagon with shit!"

From comic Don Rickles:

                   "Don't cross swords with someone who knows how to use one."

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:40 AM

Seems to be the crux of your inability to converse coherently in English, Wolfgang.

Is this a sentence Carol?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 10:44 AM

"not read just that one sentance, but to read the whole article or page in which the sentance is found."

Carol, did you mean sentence?

I believe Wolfgang's spelling is correct.

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:12 PM

Some may be interested to read what a quite conservative German newspaper (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) has written recently about Blair/Iraq/London. Yes, it is really conservative, but keep in mind McGrath's warning that European conservatives don't look so conservative to Americans.

"Blair is a master at denying claims that no one has made and making demands to which no one can object. First, he denies that the Iraq war has been a cause of terrorism and then he demands that we combat terrorism, condemn its methods and pull out its roots. Indeed, the only concession Blair has made is to admit that Iraq is becoming a recruiting ground for terrorists...The Iraq war was neither approved by the UN nor backed by the Arab world, and that's why people are able to propagandistically denounce it as an 'imperial crusade'. It's true that this war did not create terrorism, but it has encouraged it." (I pinched the translation from DER SPIEGEL)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:23 PM

Wolfgang, it's interesting but what are you trying to show with this?

Let's face it, for all sorts of reasons, TB isn't popular there anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Curious
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:47 PM

Why do these threads so often degenerate into personal slanging matches ?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: Leadfingers
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 12:49 PM

Hey !! 300 !!

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:04 PM

Is this a sentence Carol?

Only part of one, Guest,27 Jul 05 - 10:40 AM. It's a continuation of what I started with the quotes, but forgot to use elipses and I mistakenly capitalized "seems".

I was not correcting his spelling, Guest, 27 Jul 05 - 10:44 AM. I was discussing his misuse of other people's words.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:18 PM

Well not a coherent reply then was it Carol.

Let's face you started picking on the language issue with a guy who's first language, I understand, is not English.

And you could always get a spell chucker.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: dianavan
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:29 PM

Guest - Speak for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:37 PM

Yes, it's true... I make mistakes. But it was still a coherent reply, even if it's not perfect.

I'm not picking on anyone. If Wolfgang is going to go around twisting people's words and taking them out of context to make irrelevant and highly questionable points at the expense of the people he is targeting, he is not making a coherent point, nor is he contributing to coherency in the discussion itself. Quite the opposite... he is creating confusion and he is obscuring real points that others have made.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:39 PM

Although I'll grant that the way I put it was snarky.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:43 PM

"non-combatant civilian deaths" can include according to Carol "someone's ancient grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep."?

What's the problem with that Wolfgang? That clearly would be a non-combatant civilian death. (And the terms are not synonymous - you can have civilians who are combatants, and military personnel who are non-combatants.)

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:46 PM

Then I'll admit I was "snarky" and we can all go back to playing guitar or whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 01:58 PM

But here is the point I was making, and that has been obscured by nitpicking...

ALL of the deaths that occurred as a result of the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the US, Britain, and the "coalition", are the responsibility of the US, Britain, and the "coalition" countries, regardless of who did the killing.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 02:21 PM

Why don't you go and get a life.

Unfortunately those who died in 9/11 and 7/7 do not have that luxury anymore, use it don't abuse it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 02:58 PM

Going back another step, of course, it's down to the architects of September 11, since without that Bush would never have been able to take the USA to war in Iraq, and Blair wouldn't have tagged along behind.

And, since the Iraq war has suited Al Qaeda down to the ground, it's another of their successful atrocities - and this time they got someone else to do it for them.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:15 PM

I can't see how discussing important issues equals not having a life. I do think that following people around and telling them to get a life certainly could be described as not having a life.

Invoking the victims of 9/11 as a way of trying to shut people up when they are discussing important issues is shameful. I don't think the victims of 9/11 would appreciate you doing that.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:30 PM

And, CarolC, it is your statement of responsibility that I do not agree with. As I have stated. We each have an opinion on the matter, but YOU are insisting that your opinion is fact with no supporting evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:45 PM

I gave pleney of supporting evidence, beardedbruce. I can't help it if you have failed to read it.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 03:48 PM

What keeps on being ignored is that the war in Iraq is a triumph for the fanatics behind September 11th. It's helped them, it continues to help them. It might get presented as a "war against terror" but in real terms it is a war engineered by terrorists as a way of extending and deepening their power and influence.

This isn't football, it's chess. You win football by pushing forward and scoring. You win chess by out-thinking your opponent, thinking ahead and being willing to sacrifice pieces.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 04:02 PM

CarolC,

Let me correct my statement to " no convincing evidence".


I found your "evidence" lacking. You are mistaken in assuming that failure to agree with you means a failure to look at your points. I have given evidence as well: Would I be justified in saying that since you do not now agree with me, you must not have looked at it?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 04:14 PM

Invoking the victims of 9/11 as a way of trying to shut people up when they are discussing important issues is shameful. I don't think the victims of 9/11 would appreciate you doing that.

That's the point Carol they're not here to support you are they and why not, because your friends murdered them

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 05:00 PM

seems to me carol,that your evidence looks more like excuses than any thing else,no matter how you dress it,it is still an excise.
out here they chg. the word cowshit into, organicaly produced soil nutrient,hoping that it would not stink as bad in the publics ear,still does in the nose.
kind of like your evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 05:19 PM

My "friends" Shakey? I think they're your friends since you are the one who supports US and British foreign policy that keeps making them stronger and more dangerous. You too, jpk.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 05:28 PM

pampering makes them weaker?spoiled brats whine all the time to get there way too.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 05:56 PM

You must have an incredibly perverse definition for the word "pamper", jpk.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 06:56 PM

Have you tried sex for a change

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 07:16 PM

"your friends You know that's a lie, GUEST,Shakey.

You have shown that you are perfectly capable of arguing in a rational and a courteous way, and you must also know that that is far more convincing and effective. So why cheapen yourself like that?

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: GUEST,Shakey
Date: 27 Jul 05 - 08:21 PM

So why cheapen yourself like that?

There's a thread running that has more than 160 posts because the name of another thread got friggin changed.

What can I say? Sometimes the passion takes over.



Shakey
If you're not living on the edge you're taking up too much room

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: jpk
Date: 28 Jul 05 - 04:59 PM

hey carol,ever think that another reason they do these things is for the high they get from the felling of power the percieve,or maybe they just enjoy the thought of causing people to die,using what ever excuse they can.

Subject: RE: BS: 'The Face of 911' in London?
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Jul 05 - 06:08 PM

jpk, some of our own military people have indicated that they experience just what you have described in war situations. And some of them have said that they enjoy it. So is it a good thing or a bad thing?