BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Switchboard >

Reaction of U.S. Govt. to Attack

  
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
JoeCrow
09:26 / 12.09.01
quote:Originally posted by PATricky:
All flights have been cancelled...


A key arguement against Bin ladim is the lack of 757's etc in the middle east...

Appariently whoever did this knows how to fly such planes... yikes.

Flying's easy. *Landing* is hard. If you plan on crashing anyway, it ceases to be a problem. There's plenty of flight sims commercially available that will give anyone with thumbs the skillz to fly a commercial airliner. It's the takeoff/landing bit that's a bitch.
 
 
Jackie Susann
09:26 / 12.09.01
Maybe US kids should call their congresspeople or mps or whatever you have over there, and tell them you don't want your country to go to war, that you want them to do everything possible to avoid escalating the situation, that it's not acceptable for the government to use this tragedy to drum up racist support for trade wars, etc. If that's how you feel, because they're probably taking informal polls in their offices about that stuff. And/or, get in touch with peace activist groups, because they're bound to be busy already.
 
 
Tucker Tripp
09:26 / 12.09.01
I am finding the whole situation very disconcerting. I can feel some of the fallout in some way and I'm literally half a world away. It must be a very anxious, distressing and confusing time in America. I'm sorry that this has occurred.

One thing I must take exception with is the seemingly increasing use of the word "racism" on this board. It really makes me angry when people feel the need to take sides and thus brand their opponents as racsists. If you must take sides try and stick to the facts. The use of inflammatory language does not help anyone.

Crunchy BP, how do these attacks we have seen against America constitute racism any less or any more than the US's possible retaliatory strikes?

Its very easy to manipulate information using biases language. Everyone knows that condoning racism is wrong therefore if you label someoone or some action racist it automatically becomes wrong. These issues are not as simple as goodies and baddies. What we have is various groups with various interests and agendas. There is no problem unless these agendas conflict. Which they certainly do here.

It is very easy to support the underdog. EG "Look at the desparation these people must be under to commit such acts..."

I'm not denying that crimes have probably (almost certainly) been commited on all sides of the fence. But simply that does not excuse terrorism nor does it that one side or view is more "racist" than another.

Simply, again, US, Isrealis, and various Muslim states, groups and factions all have their own agandas. I don't think labelling them helps to clarify mattes at all.

Many of these extremist self proclaimed fudamentalist terrorist Muslim groups claim that no matter whether all of their demands are met or not they will not rest until they see/ bring about the destruction of Israel.

Meanwhile the standard of living and rights of Palestinean citizens of Israel are infringed everyday.

Could this all be solved by being less precious about borders, land and religion - yes. Is this going to happen - no.

So where to from here? (Let thee not cast the first stone)
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
09:26 / 12.09.01
Not sure which thread to post this in, but I'm seriously worried about how this gives 'Western' governments a mandate to crack down on civil liberties - "anti-terrorism" is already the pretext for infringing on privacy, dealing harshly with civil disobediance etc...

Oh, and synth:

quote:Originally posted by synth - esis:
Crunchy BP, how do these attacks we have seen against America constitute racism any less or any more than the US's possible retaliatory strikes?

I think the point was (without putting words into anyone's mouth) that a lot of the rhetoric that we've already heard and will continue to hear (although thankfully not here) in response to these attacks is openly racist: blame those goddam stinkin' Arabs. That and the fact that a lot of America's past and existing trade/foreign policies can be categorised as racist - see the link Crunchy posted above.

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: The Flyboy ]
 
 
Ierne
10:57 / 12.09.01
I do feel it's rather racist to spread insinuations, hyperbole and suggestionswithout giving concrete proof and hard evidence.

"Terrorism experts, after reviewing the magnitude of the attacks, said few groups in the world would have the resources to carry out such a highly coordinated sequence of destruction. One of those organizations, they said, would be the Al Quaida group headed by bin Laden, who also is the suspected mastermind of the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa."

then...

"And in south Florida, information gleaned from the hijacked planes' passenger lists have led to search warrants that the FBI is in the process of or will soon be executing, a law enforcement source told CNN.

'We're looking at South Florida ties to some of the people we're looking at,' the source said."

Don't drug cartels have that kind of money too? Or is it easier for the American Media to imagine Arabs planning this all out than Latinos?

It would be utterly humiliating to the United States if bin Laden isn'tresponsible. And that would work wonderfully for whoever isresponsible.
 
 
Ierne
11:05 / 12.09.01
Just saw autopilot disengaged's post on the Part Four thread:

"NEW YORK (Reuters) - Authorities in Massachusetts have identified five Arab men as suspects in Tuesday's attack on New York City and have seized a rental car containing Arabic-language flight training manuals at Logan International Airport, a source told the Boston Herald newspaper.
Two of the men were brothers whose passports were traced to the United Arab Emirates, the unidentified source told the Herald. One of the men was a trained pilot, the paper reported on its Web site on Wednesday."

I tried to get a Boston Herald link with some more info on this but I couldn't get through. Can anybody from Mass. cut & paste it or something?

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: Ierne ]
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
11:13 / 12.09.01
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Flyboy:
[qb]Not sure which thread to post this in, but I'm seriously worried about how this gives 'Western' governments a mandate to crack down on civil liberties - "anti-terrorism" is already the pretext for infringing on privacy, dealing harshly with civil disobediance etc...
[END QUOTE]
Yeah, I mean look at how the Uk government has used the so-called "football act" from last summer to prevent people going to Genoa, et al.?

This is a terrible event. As were Hiroshima, Dresden, Yugoslavia etc. The numbers involved don't make a difference as to whether something is morally right or wrong. As far as my personal morality goes, they were all WAY wrong.
And if justice/(god help us) revenge must be sought, then it shall. But surely the concern should be with the bereaved/injured, rather than "Who can we hit first?" and "How can we use this to bring in more legislation to make ourselves the kind of state we constantly bomb others for being?" (As a Brit, I know I'm far from qualified- we're just the quiet guy in the corner of the pub who waits for a fight then stands there shouting "Kill 'im! Fuckin' kill 'im!". I know. Not my fault.)
That's all.

[ 12-09-2001: Message edited by: stoatie ]
 
 
autopilot disengaged
11:14 / 12.09.01
ierne: the story's been picked up by the media in general now - try this:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/627028_asp.htm#BODY

details are still sketchy...may be convenient red herring...
 
 
Not Here Still
11:21 / 12.09.01
I know that it may be unlikely, but I have a question.

What does America do if the threat came from *within*?

I remember after Oklahoma city that Muslim extremists were blamed pretty much straight away - but it later emerged that Timothy McVeigh (either with or without some other (Govt?) backing was responsible.

The CIA and other security agencies clearly did not know enough to stop yesterday's events happening. So how can they be sure who is responsible straight after them?
 
 
deja_vroom
11:29 / 12.09.01
By Verbal Kint:
quote: So now everyone who doesn't like a particular country should attack it and get an apology? Don't think so. This sort of terrorist behaviour is unnacceptable no matter what the "cause". We deserve to have possibly 10,000 people killed by terrorists because our government did or didn't do something that suited them?

"Suited" them?
Suitedthem???
Starve to death while your country's resources are being drained to feed multinational corporations, having your country being bombed to ashes and relatives and friends being killed at a daily rate by OTAN planes does not seems to me to be a situation that one can think to be "suitable" or "unsuitable".
Try harder, verbal Klint. You will understand, I'm sure.
 
 
deja_vroom
11:38 / 12.09.01
Not that I condone this kind of acts, but I'm just saying that this kind of stuff is inevitable. Violence will generate violence.
It doesn't matter if one kind of violence is unleashed with the use of presidential pens and the other with bombs.
If you don't have a magic pen, and the world is too fucking busy watching the Super Bowl to pay attention to your cries, what is left?
In the end, I'm sorry because in between these giant cogs turning, it's always the common people who suffer.
 
 
Tom Coates
11:48 / 12.09.01
Just in from the haddock.org mailing list:

Just been speaking to an American friend who's partner is an
intelligence analyst working in the Pentagon. According to her:

- It's extremely unlikely any military action will be taken till next week.
- Intelligence is very much pointing to Bin-Laden.
- Use of nuclear weapons has *not* been ruled out, neither is it ruled in.
- Bush is virtually apoplectic with rage; Colin Powell is acting as a
calming influence (!)
- She'd been told the eight-planes thing was not true, but didn't
have direct access to the intelligence.
- There's a fuck of a lot of people missing from the Pentagon: 800
may be the low end of the scale. Naval intelligence was the section
hit, which is causing major problems - they probably couldn't have
picked a more devastating section to hit.
 
 
grant
12:50 / 12.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Ierne:
'We're looking at South Florida ties to some of the people we're looking at,' the source said."


Oh, hell.
 
 
Tom Coates
14:49 / 12.09.01
According to Wired.com, the FBI have already been into major ISPs getting Carnivore installed while everyone's tense about the hijackings... Completely appalling to use this event as cover for an attack on civil liberties.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
14:55 / 12.09.01
And that's just the start. Who's going to oppose draconian measures imposed as part of the "war on terrorism"?
 
 
Cherry Bomb
15:22 / 12.09.01
quote:Originally posted by wembley:

Hope everyone's friends and family are okay; one of my friends' best buddies works on the 108th floor of the World Trade Center. He slept in today.

WOW! My friend has a friend whose sister did that, too. But of course, with 50,000 people it is probably not that surprising.
 
 
The Knowledge +1
15:57 / 12.09.01
Hey, how's they use the football act to stop people going to Genoa? That aint right
 
 
The Knowledge +1
16:00 / 12.09.01
And what's carnivore?
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
16:15 / 12.09.01
These are FOIA-released documents on Carnivore. It's a recording program that does what it says on the tin;

Wired story describes how it's been implemented here. quote:The FBI's controversial Carnivore spy system, which has been renamed DCS1000, is a specially configured Windows computer designed to sit on an Internet provider's network and monitor electronic communications. To retrieve the stored data, an agent stops by to pick up a removable hard drive with the information that the Carnivore system was configured to record.
 
 
betty woo
18:07 / 12.09.01
Whatever the U.S. decides to do, they now have NATO backing them up.

From CNN:
It is the first time in 52 years that the alliance has invoked Article V -- the NATO self-defence charter that says if one member state is under attack all other member nations would defend it. The decision opens the way for NATO military and logistic support to any U.S. retaliation.
 
 
Verbal Kint
00:58 / 13.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Jade Emperor:
By Verbal Kint:

"Suited" them?
Suitedthem???
Starve to death while your country's resources are being drained to feed multinational corporations, having your country being bombed to ashes and relatives and friends being killed at a daily rate by OTAN planes does not seems to me to be a situation that one can think to be "suitable" or "unsuitable".
...

Oh, cripes, I am not arguing that! I said I DONT AGREE with much of the American governments foreign policy.

Have you lived what you describe above? If you have lived it then do you think that blowing up buildings is a great way to get conditions in your country improved?

If terrorism worked as advertised, then Northern Ireland should be independent, Palestine should have it's own state, and countless other less well known organizations should have received what they wished to gain through their actions. I also think you are projecting far more magnanamous and noble intentions on these terrorists if you really think that they are doing these things to help anyone. They may do it to further a political agenda or foment a conflict, but I can't see how that helps anyone.
 
 
MJ-12
09:35 / 14.09.01
oh, Christ
 
 
deja_vroom
12:54 / 14.09.01
no no no. focus here. I was making a comment on your use of the term "suits them". that bespeaks for a LOT of insensibility towards the relentless suffering in other less-priviledged countries.
Just that. I never mentioned my opinion about if terrorist acts were effective or not to change political landscapes - they are, by the way, but mostly to worse.
f
o
c
u
s
 
 
Anaconda Jones
20:51 / 14.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Jade Emperor:
no no no. focus here. I was making a comment on your use of the term "suits them". that bespeaks for a LOT of insensibility towards the relentless suffering in other less-priviledged countries.
Just that. I never mentioned my opinion about if terrorist acts were effective or not to change political landscapes - they are, by the way, but mostly to worse.
f
o
c
u
s

In some cases "suits" may be an accurate description. What do you mean by less priveleged countries? Anyone except the US or western Europe? There are countries in the Middle East which are very wealthy - do they use their wealth to help their own people and their neighbors? Some do, some don't.

Much terrorism is state sponsored (we don't currently know exactly on this incident) We are not seeing the people who are suffering benefitting or actually doing these actions, in fact, they are the ones who suffer in the long run when retaliation takes place.

You would think that oppressed peoples would rise up against those who are really causing their suffering which is their own leaders in many cases.


The terrorists are well funded, well fed people who have the freedom to move about the world, not necessarily citizens of "underpriveledged" countries.

Don't forget, the west is not the only region with propaganda machines in place - it's easier for a regime to paint the rest of the world as Satan than to take responsibility for their actions and their treatment of their *own people*. It is really rough to see things being done in the name of oppressed peoples by those who are actually the oppressors - their own governments.

Don't over-simplify and give terrorists more credit than they are due.
A lot of it is about politics, greed, and ideology - and it has very little to do with the suffering of the people.

While the US has participated in some actions which I did not agree with, there are those which originally started out as a *request* by one country to stop another invading it or by a people who were being persecuted. I am not going to get into why or what the ulterior motives for helping were - but some sort of assistance was offered by the US or NATO after being asked for it.

Naturally the agressor on the other side of that doesn't like the US involvement - it doesn't *suit* that governments agenda or view. So suits may be a cold, but accurate way to put it.

That

f
o
c
u
s
e
d

enough for you?

My hope is that we can get through the next month or so without reacting to this tragedy in such a way that it will cause more suffering to innocent people, while the people who are really responsible get away. It serves no purpose.

[ 15-09-2001: Message edited by: Anaconda Jones ]
 
 
deja_vroom
19:33 / 15.09.01
All quotes by Anaconda Jones. Generalizations in italic.
quote: In some cases "suits" may be an accurate description. What do you mean by less priveleged countries? Anyone except the US or western Europe? There are countries in the Middle East which are very wealthy - do they use their wealth to help their own people and their neighbors? Some do, some don't.


Yes, in some cases "suits" may be an accurate description. I don't think this one is such a case. What is your point here? It does not change an inch the fact that THERE ARE less-priviledged countries (like East Timor) who suffer with massive interventionism from CIA backed puppets like General Suharto, for instance. It's not me, it's actual facts. And nothing you say can change that.

quote: We are not seeing the people who are suffering benefitting or actually doing these actions, in fact, they are the ones who suffer in the long run when retaliation takes place.

Never said they were benefitting. As for them doing terrorist acts, how do you know? Do you kow who did it? How do you expect to SEE something which is intended to happen in the shadows, to use a term so dear to american media?

quote: You would think that oppressed peoples would rise up against those who are really causing their suffering which is their own leaders in many cases.


Their leader have leaders, my friend. Who fed Saddam Husseim until he was too big to handle? The term "The Big Area" means anything to you? Do you think anything related to international politics happens unnoticed to the USA??

quote: The terrorists are well funded, well fed people who have the freedom to move about the world, not necessarily citizens of "underpriveledged" countries.

We do not know about that. And I strongly think your statement does not correspond to reality.

quote: Don't forget, the west is not the only region with propaganda machines in place - it's easier for a regime to paint the rest of the world as Satan than to take responsibility for their actions and their treatment of their *own people*. It is really rough to see things being done in the name of oppressed peoples by those who are actually the oppressors - their own governments.


You are right - but don`t generalize. Nothing you say will make LESS TRUE the effects of american interventionism around the world - ever heard of COINTELPRO??? Milosevich, or Khomeini, they did not came up with COINTELPRO when things got bad for them and they started needing an escapegoat, COINTELPRO is a child of Mccarthysm and its ramifications are truly disturbing. And, as I said before, their leaders have leaders.

*off-topic*
I mean, how much petroil do we have left, for God`s sake? Do you honestly think that ol Uncle Sam wouldnt do something to keep hold of its gas reserves? I mean, we are not that naive...
*off-topic*


quote: Don't over-simplify and give terrorists more credit than they are due.
A lot of it is about politics, greed, and ideology - and it has very little to do with the suffering of the people.

I agree with you on you this, but I would raise the importance of "suffering of the people" in this equation. I'm not implying that the guy who orchestrated this action is some sort of virtuous Robin Hood. I mean, he's human, and we know how human can be messed up, right?


quote: While the US has participated in some actions which I did not agree with, there are those which originally started out as a *request* by one country to stop another invading it or by a people who were being persecuted. I am not going to get into why or what the ulterior motives for helping were - but some sort of assistance was offered by the US or NATO after being asked for it.


One of the dearest axioms you learn on Economics classes is that "there is no free lunch". Boy, I admire your faith in our governors, even after all these years of them fuckin up every opportunity they could put their hands on.

quote: Naturally the agressor on the other side of that doesn't like the US involvement - it doesn't *suit* that governments agenda or view. So suits may be a cold, but accurate way to put it.

That

f
o
c
u
s
e
d

enough for you?


Actually not, man. I understood each one of your statements, I agree with some and think that most of them are rubbish, but I have no fucking idea of where you want to get. Your generalizations are irrelevant. They are tru but lose significance when faced with factual EXAMPLES of ruthless american interventionism, which any good History teacher can enlist in five minutes for you. Give me dates, names and numbers.

quote:My hope is that we can get through the next month or so without reacting to this tragedy in such a way that it will cause more suffering to innocent people, while the people who are really responsible get away. It serves no purpose.

Word.

[ 15-09-2001: Message edited by: Jade Emperor ]
 
 
Verbal Kint
19:50 / 15.09.01
You have several very good points in the posting above, and some of it applies, and some is specious - as were Anacondas. Your weren't exactly brimming with examples either - beyond the Suharto comment, which if it is the case, is dreadful (I don't have enough knowlege of the East Timor situation to know and will try to do something about that.)

However, since it looks like this could be pointlessly argued for days with no resolution, is there a point to carrying it on? Other than the obvious fact it's a healthy (hopefully) discourse.

You have your views on the subject - not wrong, but your views, and we all have ours. You have your information, we all have our own. I for one simply don't have the time or energy to spend reading up on CIA conspiracies, consulting factbooks and writing three page postings complete with citations. It's not that I don't have passionate ideas and facts to support them. I am too busy getting out and trying to actually DO something in regard to this mess.


And when you make blatently inflammatory statements such as:

"...EXAMPLES of ruthless american interventionism,..."

..it kind of makes me not want to bother. It's baiting. Nothing said to answer that would be sufficient due to a particular attitude on your part. Again - it's your attitude, own it, but don't be upset if everyone doesn't adopt it.


If the rest of the 'lithers want to chime in and carry on the conversation, that would be great. I don't see any benefit for continuing it myself. If this isn't acceptable maybe I don't belong on Barbelith.

I am with Anaconda on her closing statement

[ 15-09-2001: Message edited by: Verbal Kint ]
 
 
deja_vroom
22:39 / 15.09.01
Actually I was kind of thinking about it when I posted my last post. In the end, I realized that all the different points of view were due to - well, we were talking about two different things: I was always talking about the "disease", let's put this way, while most of the american people I'm talking about it (not only here) are (understandably) concerned about the "symptoms". (Sorry for the poor analogy, but strangely, words are failing me).
At this point of history, it is crucial to be able to see ahead, not only in the short term.
Seek vengeance will act as a paliative to the symptoms, but if american people don't start paying serious attention the international affairs and their government actions, I fear that history will repeat itself. You know, "those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it etc" ...
Again, my sympathy to you people.

*holds breath with the rest of the world*
 
 
000
07:19 / 16.09.01
Senate OKs Increased Use
Of Carnivore And Wiretapping http://rense.com/general13/bbs.htm
 
 
Verbal Kint
12:46 / 16.09.01
quote:Originally posted by Jade Emperor:
Actually I was kind of thinking about it when I posted my last post. In the end, I realized that all the different points of view were due to - well, we were talking about two different things: I was always talking about the "disease", let's put this way, while most of the american people I'm talking about it (not only here) are (understandably) concerned about the "symptoms". (Sorry for the poor analogy, but strangely, words are failing me).
At this point of history, it is crucial to be able to see ahead, not only in the short term.
Seek vengeance will act as a paliative to the symptoms, but if american people don't start paying serious attention the international affairs and their government actions, I fear that history will repeat itself. You know, "those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it etc" ...
Again, my sympathy to you people.

*holds breath with the rest of the world*

Amen brother. Amen. I really fear that too.
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply