What if a pacificist was on flight 93?

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: CarolC
Date: 17 Nov 01 - 02:51 PM

Why on earth would a duck that has perfectly good wings of it's own want to fly in a crowded airplane?

DougR... same reason a person with perfectly good legs would ride in a car/train/bus/plane/ox cart/etc? (Plus, there's those little bags of peanuts they give out on the planes.)

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: robomatic
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 06:59 PM

Talk about a tongue lashing...Been down in the mouth over this thread...sometimes it speaks to me...it started out pretty cheeky... I thought the poster had gum-tion...but recently it's just become a lot of lip...(I had originally 'uvula lotta lip' but it stretched my sense of a denture)...I have no more palate for this thread...My respect for tooth has been challenged...See jaw-all later...

Just grateful to be saliva

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 02:04 PM

None of your business!

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Raptor
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 01:17 PM

Little Hawk
Where has your tongue been?
Raptor

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 01:12 PM

Its own, Doug. (snicker!) Not only do I hate birds, Raptor, but I love being petty, mean, and pedantic! :-) Just ask GUEST, if you don't believe me. I've been observing your posts, and you have not yet mispelled the word parallelohedron, but, given time, I'm sure you will...

I think your main problem is that your tongue keeps getting stuck in the disk drive. There are local computer stores who can help you with that. Check it out, and let me know how it goes.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: DougR
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 12:52 PM

Why on earth would a duck that has perfectly good wings of it's own want to fly in a crowded airplane?

DougR

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Raptor
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 12:45 PM

Birds are people too.
Raptor

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 12:42 PM

There seems to be some confustion between pacifist and vegitarian. Pacifists don't believe in violence towards people. Some are also vegitarians and will not eat cows and such. This does not mean that cows and such are people.
Now, the degree to which where one exists in the cosmos does affect definitions one applies to things. One finds in the Northern counties varring views on certain definitions depending on the place one grew up and the events of one's life. This is why instead of argueing about the definitions of the past, I think a truth and reconciliation process is some thing that we pacifists should endorce as a road to real and lasting peace. I say this with special attention to folks who I have different view with, peace between those of us who agree is not much a peace is it?
So, in hopes of peace, Declan, keep talking and listening.
Peace here and there,
Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Raptor
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 12:17 PM

I used to think Little Hawk was a pacifist untill I read his posts and realized that he hates birds.
Raptor

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST,Declan
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 11:57 AM

Whether you are a terrorist, pacifist, war-monger, freedom saviour or freedom fighter depends largely on your point of view.

You may well think whales are pacificists, but you mightn't think so if you were a piece of plankton.

Terrorism is not a political philosophy, but a tactic used by those who are (in their minds) waging war against an enemy, the tactic is to induce fear into the people you are attacking. The people who did the dreadful deeds of September 11th succeeded in doing this. The American bombs reigning in on Kabul have no doubt had a similar affect on the people there. Since September 11 it seems to me that CNN, Sky News and other blanket coverage of this war has been doing a great job of keeping up the fear in this part of the world, so much so that when a terrible thing like last Monday's air crash happens, everyone assumes this is another attack and is terrorised by accident. This by the way (appears to have been) an unfortunate accident. 'Collateral damage' is not an unfortunate accident - it is a direct consequence of the bombing. If thirty people get killed by a car bomb in Omagh this is a terrible outrage - if it happens in a red cross centre in Afghanistan it's an unfortunate side effect of war ! Don't get me wrong, neither event should ever happen, but what it is called and how the news is presented and received will greatly colour your perception of it.

There has been a serious amount of rubbish been talked in this thread about the situation in Northern Ireland. It is true that some Americans funded the campaign of the IRA, while the US Government supported the British 'side' in the conflict. At other times the US Government helped significantly with the current Peace process which I and other Irish people voted overwhelmingly in favour of in the referendum on the subject. The IRA has waged a savage campaign during the last 30 odd years, but thankfully their guns are now silent. Not all 3,500 deaths were at the hands of the IRA, some were at the hands of fanatics on the other side as well, many were at the hands of the 'security forces', members of which acted in collusion with terrorists to defeat the 'terrorist' enemy and in this way became terrorists themselves. By the way the referendum I spoke about substantially altered the territorial claim on the 6 counties of Northern Ireland (Ulster is a province consisting of 9 counties, 3 of which are in the Republic). This did not however affect the rights of the people of the 6 counties to call themselves Irish if they choose to do so.

While I'm at it, there's no such thing as the UK Mainland. That's another smallish island off the coast of Europe.

If we could stop pinning labels on each other, try to understand each others point of view, discuss our diferences and try to get along a lot of this stuff might never happen.

If that point of view makes me a pacifist I'm glad to be called one.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 10:38 AM

Ah yes, a duck in plain dress, or feathers whould indeed be a give away, but, than again, a fake beard, dark glasses and a big coat may do the trick, but how hard would it be to disguise a whale? Though an air breathing mamal, they are rather bulky, and I believe one has to keep a whale somewhat damp. I remember smelling whales at sea, a dead give away. Then again, Quakers sometimes are easy to spot as well, I seldom wear collars, and often go about the town in a broad brimmed Elias Hickslike hat. However, that may be a good thing, a sort of deterant, like an armed marshall. An obvious pacifist on the plane may be a deterant, as they are unpredicable and often don't go along with the crowd, like, you may ask everyone to do this and that, and it is often the Quaker that askes why. Then again, ducks seem to be rather unpredictable as well. Whales, well, I have not spent lots of time with them, other than a chance meeting or two, and they did what I expected they would... broke surface, exhaled, smelt strongly, then sounded. What were we talking about anyway, OH yes... pacitism... I'm for it... is the tea on? Well, it should be. Duck and whalemeat pie with that? No, not for me, thanks, not enough whales to go around.
Cheers,
Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 16 Nov 01 - 09:13 AM

Up to a point LH but wouldn't a duck travelling by aeroplane be a bit of a giveaway....?

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 08:47 PM

But not geese, right, LH?

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 08:42 PM

Whales tend to be pacifists, it's true, but even a staunch pacifist can take only so much, as demonstrated in the Nantucket incident. Therefore, be warned, ye slavering, blustering, testosterone-drunk Rambo imitators, and don't think ye can walk all over us any time ye please! Grrrrr!

As for ducks, I've observed them quite a bit. They tend to be quarrelsome at times, but are not known for extreme violence, only violent emotions and the occasional spat.

I should think that either ducks or whales would make good pacifists aboard airplanes, but whales are too heavy.

Therefore for purely practical reasons I cast my vote for the ducks, as both pacifists and sky marshalls.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 06:56 PM

Good Question. My first instinct is that it would be the Duck. I was called a duck as a kid, as I was the only Friend in school, so it went from being called a Quacker to a Duck. However, when I think of the sort of achitiypal ducks, Daffy and Donald, Donald seems to be an ex-navy man and Daffy is often embroiled in violent conflict with Bugs. Generally, unless really pressed (as with the Whale which sank the Nantucket - and yes Quaker owned and comanded, whaling ship Essex...) Whales are a rather gentle bunch.
Cheers Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 06:39 PM

So Larry, if you put Duck and Whale on the plane, which one will be the pacifist, and which one the sky marshall?

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 06:30 PM

Hey LH If you win the lotery, maybe we can institute a program to put a pacifist on every flight to ballance the sky marshall, kinda like Duck and Whale. Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 02:32 PM

Doug, I would love to have a lot of money. In this system one seriously needs money. I dream about it daily. :-) Let's hope your wish comes true!

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: DougR
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 01:47 PM

L. H., I sincerely hope some day you win a lottery that makes you a multi-millionaire. Then perhaps we would hear no more ranting and raving about rich folks, and the thing that made them rich ...money. With all that new found wealth, you might even be able to save Cuba! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 11:03 AM

My dear Friend:
As with everything in life, making a Duck and Whalemeat pie is a matter of balance. Back in the days when our Bretherin sailed the world for oil and blood, well, there where a lot more Whales and a lot more Ducks. Now, I don't think the idea was to get the ratio of Duck to Whale right by using enough Ducks to equal one Whale, rather, I think one made Whale meat hamburgers, sausage, hotdogs, shoes and with a little of what was left one made a pie with a Duck or two.
And, further, in balance, I don't think in the days we hunted the leviathan, there were as many tree huggers. So, we would have to emaine that these Duck and Whale eating Quakers, as well as the strongly objecting Environmentalist Veegans, and hungery High Jackers all where on the airoplane in, say, 1856.
Now, in that year, there would have been a great deal of trouble to find a place to take off and land, and should they have gotten the plane up off the ground, which no doubt they could have, as there was a lot of kerosine to fly with, or Whale oil for that matter, well, the next challenge for the Highjakcers, after finishing their pie, is to stay airbourne, at least into the 1970's, when the WTC was completed and up long enough to become part of the New York patrimony and worth attacking. Further, no doubt, other things would have been actively being discussed, such as Slavery and other controversies of the day. One would have to ask, what if there were runaway slaves on the flight, wouldn't one? Then, if a runaway slave was safely at 35,000 feet up, does the Dred Scott decision apply, is the fellow no longer a slave, and would he object to Duck and Whalemeat pie, or concider it a real treat after the horrors of slavery?
I think thee speaks my mind, I will stick with the Peace Testimony and leave the creation of nonsensical hypotheticals to the draftboard, who wanted to know if I would fight is the US was to be attacked by Martians. To which I answered, No, I would just get in my time machine and keep jumping back to the day before they arrived.
Peace and responcible culinary delights,
Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 15 Nov 01 - 09:03 AM

Larry,

hell of a job to stuff a duck with a whale! :D

So you are saying that if there had been a Nantucket duck-stuffer on the flight then they woodent have been able to open the cockpit door because the treehuggers pet tree would have been in the way......???

I still go with the testimony though

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 08:03 PM

Dear Wandering Minstral:
I might add, however, that in the advices of the Nantucket meeting, there is a wonderful recipie for Duck and Whalemeat pie. And, if there was a Paciticist on the airplane with a Duck and Whalemeat pie, than ... between all the hijackers loving the pie, and all the Green party folks yelling at them not to eat it, well... Hell! they'd just not have time for nothin! I agree, what a stupid hypothitical, I have a better one, what if Superman was on the plane, and Lex Luthor was the head of the hijackers, would it make a difference if Lex Luthor had kriptonite, or would Superman still figure out a way of winning. What if Superman was a Quaker, would he like... well... save folks without hurting the highjackers, and would he pass on the Duck and Whalemeat pie?
Ask Spaw.
Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 06:25 PM

Given the fact that in North America the prevailing and clearly dominant religion is the worship of money, what does that say about the separation of church and state? It appears to me that they are as inextricably entwined here as they are anywhere else...it's just a different religion, that's all. What is more ignoble...to worship a universal divine spirit or a humanly created paper currency? And ultimately, which is more dangerous to both man and Nature? I leave it to each one of you to decide.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 04:13 PM

Hi Lepuss Rex,

You might think that the Saudi Arabian government doesn't support "terrorists" but how do you know? The Saudi's, many of the sultans and sheiks practice a conservative idelogical form of Islam called Wahabism which is the motivation for such extreme reactions in the Taliban.

At this point, there is no factual basis to assume that the Saudi Arabian govenment is acting in good faith. One red flag is that they refused inquiry into the background of some of the Arab based terrorists on the Sept. 11 incident. There are many historical instances of a country saying one thing and doing another including the US.

The Bush administration doesn't dare ruffle the feathers of Saudi Arabia as long as the oil contracts are there.

Many Muslims today are mute on the actual role of Zionism. Bush's vision for a Palestinian state is different than Hamas. Many Muslims feel that Israel doesn't belong there.

In short, we can't believe everything that we read about what Saudi Arabia says officially because there is the issue of Zionism to which they are categorically opposed and have been at least since the Israel was accepted by the UN. This carries over to the position of the US to accept Zionism.

Guiliani had it right when he refused the $10,000 for by the rich Arab benefactor. It was a politically motivated gesture.

We are dealing with concepts of theocratic states whether Muslim or Jewish. This is somewhat foreign to the notion of separation of church and state.

Frank

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 03:52 PM

LOL! You're what would be referred to as a "soft" Scottish conservative.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 02:19 PM

conservative Scots favour the kilt and bagpipes over the leisure suit and the saxophone

What a hard call! Can't I select the kilt and the saxophone?

Alex

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 12:31 PM

Some more dumb questions:

What if an adult blue whale was on flight 93?

The plane would not have been able to leave the ground, and everyone would have been saved!

What if Rick Derer was on flight 93?

We would all have been spared reading this silly thread.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: DougR
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 11:50 AM

Thanks, WM.

DougR

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: A Wandering Minstrel
Date: 14 Nov 01 - 10:17 AM

DougR

just so we can be clear about it... here is the text of the Quaker Peace testimony:

"We utterly deny all outward wars and strife and fighting with outward weapons for any end or under any pretense whatsoever; this is our testimony to the whole world. The Spirit of Christ by which we are guided is not changeable, so as once to command us from a thing as evil and again to move us unto it; and we certainly know and testify to the world that the Spirit of Christ by which we are guided will never move us to fight and war against any man with outward weapons, neither for the Kingdom of Christ nor for the kingdoms of this world."

and no, it doesn't seem to mention geese :)

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: DougR
Date: 13 Nov 01 - 06:30 PM

Thanks for the reply, Larry. I'm sure glad I didn't haver to slay a whale before my wife would marry me. I have no idea where I would have found one!

DougR

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST,Lepuss Rex
Date: 13 Nov 01 - 02:17 PM

Frank,

The U.S. has not declared war on Saudi Arabia because the Saudi government has not been supporting terrorists. the Saudis who have been involved in terrorism were doing so largely outside of Saudi Arabia and without the knowledge/support of the Saudi government. That is fundamentally different than what occurred with Afghanistan as well as with other nations like Iran, Syria, and Libya.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 13 Nov 01 - 06:51 AM

Dear Guest: In point of fact the Irish acceptance of soverinty over 32 counties was based in the treaty which concluded the Anglo Irish war, said treaty which provided for Britain to leave the remaining six counties in Ulster two years after the signing of the treaty. As such, more than an aspiration, citizens of the Northern counties have always had the right and have held Irish passports. I mention Carol Ann Kelly, there have been numerous child murders in retailation by crown forces. Rather than trading vague allusions, do recomend books, I read alot. I would also point out that throughout the war, the United States and Britain have sought to prove in US courts, nuetral environments free of censorship, that the IRA was involved in terrorism rather than insurection. They failed in every instance. I would direct your attention to the Doherty case, the decision of which I posted a few years ago here in responce to a solicitor friends, Richard Bridge's contention that the IRA was a terrorist group.
I think that our conversation proves, that in order for there to be real peace in Ireland, we need a process of truth and reconcilliation, as has been going on in South Africa.
Doug, yes some paciifists eat meat, and hunt. I am one of them. In fact, Quakers in Nantucket where some of the fiercest whalermen in the profession and many Nantucket Quaker girls would not become enguaged to a Quaker boy who had not killed a whale. There are a few Quaker vegitarians, but, that is a separate conviction from our Peace Testimony, which is not based on diet, but conviction that killing people is not something we wish to do.
Cheers all, Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Nov 01 - 06:21 AM

InOBU,

What clause 2 of the Constitution of The Republic of Ireland states does not make The Republic of Ireland a 32 county entity - It declares an aspiration towards a united Ireland. The existance of that clause has become an embarassment to the Irish Government and is illegal under the terms of the Treaty of Rome and the Charter of the United Nations (neither of which were in existance when the Republic of Ireland was created in 1921/2). If you doubt or disagree with this and believe that the republic of Ireland has a just claim to Ulster, you must then acknowledge that Iraq's (Saddam Hussein's) claim to Kuwait is equally justified.

You recommend that I read a book entitled "too long a sacrifice". I could recommend quite a number of books on the same suject that might give you broader based, and more objective, perspective on the subject.

Out of interest I intend examining the specific case you mention. If what you state is correct it was no act of terrorism - it was murder. In general, unlike the US forces in Vietnam, British troops in Northern Ireland operate under civil control, their remit is that of aid to the civil power. In my time there, all patrols were accompanied by members of the RUC and they were in charge. For each member of a foot patrol every round had to be accounted for and there were strict rules of engagement. For any soldier who discharged his weapon, whilst on duty, there existed, and probably still exists, an equally strict investigation procedure. Time of incident called in and logged, on return to barracks RUC CID would interview the RUC members accompanying the patrol, members of the patrol and the soldier who fired. A report would then be submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions / Crown Prosecution Service. CID would also attempt to interview civilian witnesses, I say attempt because in certain areas (Republican and Loyalist) there existed a high degree of witness intimidation and a culture of "heard nothing", "saw nothing", "say nothing". To ignore this, individuals risked being attached to the floors of their houses with nails through their kneecaps. Now you may ask why witnesses would not come forward in such an instance? What purpose would be best served? The answer is equally obvious given that all criminal prosecutions are based on a case being proved beyond reasonable doubt. The soldier involved would, in all probability, be acquitted and the propaganda value of the incident would be enhanced one hundred-fold.

To Jack the Sailor 03:25 offering Very, very funny - enjoyed reading it. Just the thing to ease tensions under the current circumstances.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 07:15 PM

Doug, there are many varieties of pacifist, just as there are many varieties of conservative. Communist conservatives, for example, would like to bring back the glorious days of Brezhnev or maybe even Stalin, while conservative Scots favour the kilt and bagpipes over the leisure suit and the saxophone.

The kind of pacifist who does not favour eating animals is called a vegetarian pacifist. I'm sure you know this, but you did ask, so.... :-) Very few North Americans favor "killing animals for food", which is why they get the local slaughterhouse to do it for them...out of sight, out of mind...

I have heard that the Janes (a religious group in India) try strenuously to avoid killing any form of sentient life, including tiny insects. That is what you could call a very thorough form of pacifism.

Then there are people whose idea of pacifism is just giving the finger to other drivers in rush hour traffic, instead of shooting them.

Takes all kinds...

Be that as it may, I have never heard of a pacifist exactly like the one in the satirical story that led off this thread, and I frankly doubt that such a being exists, except in the minds of people who have watched WAY too many John Wayne movies while growing up.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: DougR
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 06:16 PM

Larry, your reply at 5:49PM caused me to wonder: do pacifists kill animals for food? Or does pacifist beliefs only appy to killing people?

DougR

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 06:05 PM

Of course I feel bad for those lost as well. I'm also tired of the constant state of panic over this issue. I hope I can make light of it without disrespect.

I think what America needs is a tasty adversary against which we can take up arms, (and forks and knives) and defeat soundly either individually of in small family groups.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 05:59 PM

Joe, the war in Afghanistan is a continuation of the Gulf War. First, Saddam, second, bin Laden.

How do you spell relief? "O-I-L"

Why has Bush not declared war on Saudi Arabia? (Not that I would want him to but he said he would declare war on all countries that supported terrorism.)

Frank

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 05:49 PM

Dear Jack: Not to make fun in the face of so many lives lost, a matter for which I feel true and real sorrow...
But... in the face of other irony, YES! Shooting is too good for those Geese. They should be stuffed with granola, apple and orange, cream sherry, fresh garlic some other nice spices, dill I should think... and as a lesson to other such criminals, eaten.
Happy Thanksgiving in spite of the terrible times. Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 04:14 PM

I think in this case being able to blame it on one large, foreign, especially delicious species may work to the government's advantage. Especially before Thanksgiving.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 03:54 PM

It will be necessary to find a particular evil bird leader to focus people's hatred upon, otherwise it is doubtful that the American public will support a massive military response against terrorist birds. Howard the Duck is one possibility, but I'm sure the State Department can come up with a better one...probably some warbird formerly on their payroll. Stay tuned.

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 03:25 PM

I couldn't resist this Larry...

I am sorry to report that the bird that brought down the plane was a Canada goose. The US is planning an immediate response. Patriotic Americans are being deployed to hunting blinds as we speak. Bush has been quoted as saying. "This is not a war against the people of Canada, or even against other Canadain birds. The Canadian goverment must surrender all members of this terrorist bird organization within one month or face the consequences."

Luckily, since it is November, we will be able to comply.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST,Cletus Purcel
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 02:34 PM

John,

It is inaccurate to equate U.S. bombings in Afghanistan to the WTC bombing/terrorism. First of all, the U.S. is not targeting civilians and in fact seems to be bending over backwards to avoid this. Lest you forget, the terrorists specifically targeted civilians.

If the potential for civilian war casualties was a valid excuse for the U.S. to NOT pursue hostilities against a fanatical regime, then I guess that most folks in Europe would be speaking German now.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: InOBU
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 10:53 AM

THere is some likelyhood that birds brought down the jet, just now at JFK... I hope you all don't go about declaring war on birds everywhere, inocent or terrorist birds...
To our annonimous guest... Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, at the time we speak of, in the Irish constitution is both nuetral and a 32 county entity. I don't have space here to educate you on the war in Ireland, now that most of the censorship restrictions have been lifted, I suggest you may wish to read a book called "too long a sacrifice", many of the concultions of which I don't agree with, but the history of it is pretty uncotroversable. It was written by a journalsit, who I knew, whoes name I am blanking on, as I am listing to the news reports on today's crash... so I am not giving this my full attention. I would ask how it is an accedient or unintended consiquence of war when a British soldier puts the barrle of his gun against the head of a ten year old girl's head, on a quiet street and says, this is for my mates who were killed you whore, and blows her brains all over the street. It does not seem to me to be anything but terrorism. But than again, I have the disadvantage of living in a nation without censorship laws, at least for the time being.
Cheers Larry

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 10:39 AM

For Larry the InOBU

"I agree the US did a lot to encourage the war in Ireland... in aiding and abeting the BRITISH in continuing a war solely to keep NATO forces in a non alined nation."

I never realised the debt of gratitude we all owe. I'd love to hear the explanation, apart from allowing terrorists, unhindered, to raise funds and buy arms to assist in the murder of over three and a half thousand innocent civilians both in Ulster and on the mainland of the British Isles. Also in what non-aligned nation were NATO troops maintained? If you mean Northern Ireland - that Larry is part of the United Kingdom (You might not like that fact but it is a fact and will remain so until such time as the people of Northern Ireland decide otherwise). If you consider Northern Ireland to be under occupation, then more so are the former Confederate States of America. Northern Ireland came into being as part of an agreed settlement when the Republic of Ireland was formed, the Southern States were quite within their constitutional rights when they elected to cecede from the Union, they were subsequently defeated and have remained occupied ever since, under what appears to your terms of reference. It always amuses me to hear people talking (historically) about Ireland as a nation, prior to the arrival of the Normans (1066), when was Ireland ever a united nation?

"....ask yourself, my dear pacifist if the British soldier who blew Carol Ann Kelly's brains all over that Belfast street at point blank range, may have had some small part in the war in Ireland, or perhaps the Queen who gave a meddle (medal) to the British soldier who opened fire on a civil rights demostration on Bloody Sunday might have had some role in all this."

The only reason those soldiers were there was to assist the civil power in maintaining law and order - the major threat to life and limb during the period of the two incidents you quote was from Republican gunmen and bombers. In any confrontation accidents do happen - that that is so, is almost as unavoidable as it is regretable - but they are accidents, not deliberate, intentional attacks on a civilian population. I can think of a number of instances where members of the security forces in Northern Ireland have sacrificed their lives to save members of the public - I cannot recall any instance where a member of the para-militaries (Republican or Loyalist) has done the same ( I discount those occasions where bomb-makers have managed to blow themselves up in the process of making a bomb as quite patently their intention was to take life). As to the medal, every soldier who serves in Northern Ireland is awarded a General Service Medal.

Post 1798, a movement specifically formed to promote armed struggle in Ireland was founded in America and it has always provided heavy financial support. In 1866 Irish-Americans actually tried to invade Canada - didn't get very far though.

As to the comments previously made by "Pacifist" regarding the Kennedy family. If there ever was a candidate for someone who should have drowned at birth, my vote would have been for Joseph. Remember him, Ambassador to the Court of St.James in 1939, left to his advice there would have been no American intervention in Europe during WWII. Thankfully, for the whole of Europe and democracy throughout the world, FDR relied on other advice.

To JohnP above:

The US led coallition is in a war - GWB declared it in response to the attacks levelled against enlightened, democratic civilisation on 11th September. The Taliban regime in Afghanistan has to go, so that Bin Laden no longer has a safe refuge from which he can train his followers and launch future attacks. I believe that the Taliban regime will crumble, and in a fairly short time frame, that is when coallition governments and international agencies will have to win the "Hearts and Minds" of the Afghan people. Bush, Blair, Rumsfeld and Powell have all hammered home the message that this is going to be a long haul - one thing they do give any indication of is how long a long haul might be (example: War of the Running Dogs - Malaysia 1947 to 1960 - for Afghanistan I believe that that time scale will be exceeded). I have just heard that there has been another plane crash in New York - as yet it is unconfirmed as to whether or not this is a terrorist attack - How many innocent civilians you ask? As few as possible, but get the job done or the answer to your question becomes an open number.

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Coyote Breath
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 08:44 AM

as I mentioned in another thread (are you still afraid of airplanes) My brother Dave is a Flight Attendent Supervisor. He knew, well, the entire crew of flight 93. He was their supervisor. He is based in San Francisco. I'm not sure I understand the silliness of patriot lady..I don't understand any of this. A pacifist WASN'T on flight 93. The concept of that "piece" is stupid beyond belief. There were victims and murderers on flight 93. There were heroes, there were cowards, there wewre people tryin go do their jobs, there were fathers and mothers and children and... What kind of jerk writes s--- like that?? I'm late for work and I just can't deal with this....sorry!

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: John P
Date: 12 Nov 01 - 07:17 AM

The sad fact is that every time one of our bombs kills an innocent civilian in Afghanistan, or even a Taliban soldier who was forced into service, we are making ourselves into the same sort of people who attacked the World Trade Center. How many civilian deaths are are we allowed to accumulate before we become monsters? Where do we draw the line between "acceptable collateral damage" and terrorism? Do we really want people who would invent and use a phrase like that when they are talking about killing innocent people flying around with airplanes full of bombs?

I've heard way too many people equating pacifism with treason in the last few weeks, as if being a war monger -- a killer of other people -- was a good, patriotic, and Christian thing to be.

John Peekstok

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist had been on flight 93?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 11 Nov 01 - 11:25 PM

I think of myself as a pacifist. I believe somebody has to stand up for peace, even when it's impractical. Still, I don't know what I'd do if I had been called to military service in response to Hitler's Blitzkrieg, or to the World Trade Center attacks. If I had been on Flight 93, I'd do anything I could to stop those people from using an airplane as a weapon of mass destruction.

If America didn't have a history of using military force in Muslim lands, would the terrorists have attacked the World Trade Center?

There are times when we can wage peace, when we can break the cycle of violence. I don't think the World Trade Center attack is one of those situations. Maybe, though, we could have prevented the World Trade Center attacks by not waging the Gulf War.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 01 - 10:47 PM

So did I...we used to stick pins in it! (just kidding also) :-)

- LH

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: DougR
Date: 11 Nov 01 - 09:18 PM

That's funny, Rick. Of course I didn't have a GI Joe. I had a Joe McCarthy doll (just kiddin')

DougR

Subject: RE: What if a pacificist was on flight 93?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 11 Nov 01 - 04:39 PM

Doug, I even busted my GI Joe down to buck private!