Slashdot Mirror
Further Updates On Terrorist Attack
Contradicting earlier reports, reader Adam Brookman writes: "I can guarantee that no car bomb went off in front of the State Dept. in DC. My father is part of the critical personel at State dept. When I read that I called him. He said he heard the same thing and he also heard that the building was hit by a plane, but neither were true."
Worth reading is this analysis of the motives and some possible suspects in today's violence, at Jane's International Security News. They've picked three plausible attackers. Motive aside, Jack Bryar has a convincing take on who is really most hurt by the attacks today.
babyruth writes: "amazon.com has a Red Cross Relief fund set up on their homepage, where you can contribute online. Only several hundred have contributed so far, let the power of /. help!" Iridium provides a link straight to the donations page, noting that "All standard fees are waived -- all proceeds go directly to the Red Cross." Of course, the Red Cross is -still- in desperate need of blood. If you can donate, please call 1-800-HELP-NOW to find the donation center nearest to you.
iggyflashbulb writes: "CNN reports some oddball group not associated with bin Laden is attacking Kabul at night. Are they taking advantage of the NY situation or did they create it?"
An anonymous reader writes: "Following the sad (and outrageous) mess of these terrorist attacks, results are already starting to impact the country. When a RSM failed on one of our 5500 Ciscos, we recieved the following notice
'Due to a national emergency completion of your case, delivery of your parts or engineer will be delayed until further notice. Several areas of the country have restricted transportation and currently no air traffic is available. Cisco will notify you as soon a we are able to dispatch your order.'
There doesn't seem to any information on Cisco's site."
CERT is in action as well: SilentTone writes: "Ween Hall at Carnegie-Mellon University was evacuated today so the the Computer Emergency Response Team could go into action."
Many readers have been assembling mirrors for the overloaded news sites of the world. Jon Anhold writes: "I've compiled more photos and what not, mirrored many of the sites around to help the load. They're available here: http://ziggy.dreamland.net/wtc/"
Owen Bossola writes: "This is a simple webpage I put up with shots I took all day of the World Trade Center. I go to school across the river at Stevens Institute of Technology and I watched the whole thing from campus. It is absolutely nuts, I'm looking out my window and for the first time, downtown NYC is dark, and there aren't two large buildings gleaming back at me."
rhyder writes: "I was last in the World Trade Center and the attached World Financial Center on Saturday evening. Many people I know work in those buildings, even more live and work in the shadow of those 2 towers.
From the Port Authority of NY and NJ:
- The Port Authority
- Trade Center Concourse Level Map
- Trade Center Plaza Level Map
- Trade Center Complex Overview
- Area Map showing southern tip of Manhattan and the Trade Center location."
Anyone else able to confirm this rumor?
Jon Bishop asks: "Why Today? Why did this attack happen on September 11, 2001. Here is a guess. I played with the date commonly used for programming. YYYYMMDD returns 20010911. 911...in 2001. Is this play on numbers intentional or coincidence?" It may be significant that the anniversary of a Congressional resolution "favoring a Jewish homeland in Palestine" falls on this date. Then again, if you go back a century or two, you may find a lot of anniversaries that seem just as significant.
Carl Merritt writes: "Since many sites seem to be creaking under the load today I've dumped every relevant picture and video I can find onto my server, please feel free to suck up some of my unused bandwidth with downloads or links: http://www.binaryvista.com/WTC/ I'll probably leave it up for a couple weeks, or until CNN asks me to remove their pictures ;-)."
An Anonymous Coward writes "I just want to remind everyone that there is still active air cover over at least Chicago. A tanker is orbiting O'Hare and at least what appear to be two F-15s are making the rounds. If you would like more information including frequencies I suggest subscribing to the CARMA mailing list at QTH.net for up to date monitoring information."
Disheartening news from Egypt: soulflakes points to this story of some Egyptians celebrating the attacks today. Here's a BBC piece which indicates the feeling is shared in some other African countries. This doesn't mean that all or most people in any country feel the same way.
yoda389 writes: "I'm getting reports from friends that gas prices are jumping to as much as $5.00 a gallon. There are huge lines at all gas stations here in my hometown someplace in Wisconsin." And ikohl1 writes: "A friend just informed me of how gas prices were raised to $3.50 in a town near where i live. I didn't believe him at first but I found this article on Yahoo."
Gas prices may fluctuate in the short term, but in the long haul, effects on exports of goods physical and abstract may be affected just as drastically: elliotj writes: "MSNBC has a Steven Levy opinion piece on the possible implications of today's attack on America and governmental policy on encryption export restrictions. Personally, I think we need to determine exactly what happened before blaming physical or electronic security measures for a role in the tragedy. I heard the planes were hi-jacked with knives ... that doesn't sound very high-tech or a sign of significant security failings to me. It is the act itself that is so shocking and sickening."
i could easily say something about palestinian squirrels or Osama Bin Koala, but i just am not in the mood. this type of event depresses hell out of me. i know one can easily consider the loss of life and death toll and think "this is horrible". but it is when i think about the small things that really bother me. imagine, everyone on their way to work, listening to the stereo, just rocking out, never expecting that today was the day they die. or the little kid who kisses his mommy goodbye when he leaves for school. it was the last time. and to even begin to consider how the families and friends of those who have died and are missing feel. there are people going to sleep tonight not knowing if they will ever see their spouse, kid, or best friend ever again. so i will try to get my mind off all of this.
No we can't. We must fight this TOOTH AND NAIL. We can't change our (americans) lives because of the terrorist attack. If we lose even the slightest amount of freedom the terrorists have WON.
We must fight the good fight and not let people in congress pass new laws. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.".
It is a tragic and sad thing that has happened. This is an attack on humanity and civilization and the world as a whole, especially americans tne symbol of freedom and capitalism CANNOT bend, we cannot break, we cannot even flex.
Will I still fly American Airlines? Yep. I always have and always will.
I am not going to change my ways of exercising my freedoms for terroists, not now, not ever.
I think something like this should give everyone new perspective, but I don't think new laws will protect us at all. Just take away our freedoms and let the terrorists win.
Jeremy
It is very important that we all get back to 'business as usual' as quickly and calmly as possible. If we give in to terrified speculation, hording gas, selling our stock or other panic moves that will fsck our country then we may as well throw up our hands and say, "Terrorists Win!"
If we get back to business and focus on providing support for families and blood for the wounded we will come out of this OK.
God Bless,
Jason Henriksen
Yeah, and the village idiot will ascend to the throne (a widely-distributed fake Nostradamus prophecy).
Nostradamus wrote his "prophecies" in a language that only he knew in fear of death. Scholars have been trying to translate his ramblings for hundreds of years and every once in awhile they try and take their "translations" and compare them to modern events. Heck, most studies of his work said that he had no further predictions after 2000/05/05 which was widely viewed to be his prediction of the end of the world. Guess what? We're still here.
This is quite a nice page on why the WTC collapsed.
Im surprised how quick the response is to write these articles.
http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm
would comprise a truly musical response to this event, should the perps be *DEFINITELY* identified. (very important. DON'T hit the wrong people!)
I hate to say this last bit, as it hurts me.. but..
kill *them*, their *entire families*, their *entire extended families*, and their *ancestors* (defilation of gravesites); ALL of their friends, etc. etc, etc..
Jihad!
Fire with fire.
It worked for the Cosa Nostra, and the KGB.. It'll work for us. Show them we can go absolutely nuts without limit, and make it VERY personal. Throw in some Hannibal shit just to make things interesting.
And no.. this not a joke or a troll.
If they are not discussing shit like this in washington, they just aren't thinking.
Brak: What's THAT?
Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
Sorry, don't buy it. How many extreme greenies know how to fly jumbo jets? I doubt that the American pilots would be able to be convinced to crash their planes into those buildings. We'll likely find out that the pilots were killed before they crashed and that the hijackers were at the controls.
It is more than just rights lost now. It starts a trend, it sets a mindset. It changes pressures and ploys people will use to pass oppresive measures. Don't underestimate the ways people will use this to their advantage. For one I can see bubbling to gun control and several other things. Maybe the chatter will die down but I can see many opportunity seekers trying to "protect" america from things like "guns, terrorists, etc", I mean Hey whats the difference?
:(
It happens. There are already people whop preach the "restrict encryption use" so that "evil people" can't "secretly" communicate using encryption. Come on laws like the DMCA pass in peacetime! This is still peacetime but people are in a state of shock and sadness and a need to "fix" what is now "broken". People with an agenda will be glad to use anything to their advantage and no I don't think im over-reacting
Jeremy
Uhmm, cute but incorrect. I don't believe nostradamus's prophecies, but to follow it correctly.
City of God... Definately not NYC, Jerusalem is the city of God === Jerusalem
Where the two brothers... 3 buildings fell, and they weren't brothers, they were 1 center with MANY workers and separate offices, if you're going to follow that logic, the brothers must be the people at war. This could be the Palestinians vs Isreali, or perhaps the civil war being played out in Afghanistan. Brothers don't have to love each other, they are just "related" some how. (in prophecies at least, I love my brother) == Inconclusive, but it's 2 political factions
Fortress... Pentagon, eh, maybe, but that's an office building. Note that they didn't crash into a military BASE where there would be missiles and such to attack them. This is perhaps the US as a whole more accurately, since the US has not suffered an attack on their soil of this magnitude for a long time, but is a symbolically important target to many groups. Of course, the US is very open. Crossing boarders in other countries is much more difficult. Perhaps this could be viewed as the World Trade Center, the warground of what was until not long ago, and I am sure will remain the modern warfare, that is fought at a terminal in stock shares, not with guns. == Also inconclusive
Great Leader... GWB, Congress, The US... Keep giong, it could even be someone on the other side, the Great Leader of the attack (though I don't think he's so great) == Still inconclusive
Big City... Eh, NYC
Still, this is pretty ambiguous. I don't really follow nostradamus nor do I think that this is one of the signs of the end of the world. This is bad, this sucks, this is a shock to us, this isn't apocalyptic prophecy. OBL (not to cast this on him until it's known) is not the sort of charismatic leader to start the kind of war that gets printed in the bible in the end of days. Whoever did this will be brought to justice swiftly and forcefully. This isn't a war they can win. The one in the Bible is one that drags out and is fought hard by both sides. Not to sound overconfident, but I haven't seen the sort of military force yet that I would expect from such a power. Until planes fly over my house that aren't from the US, and start carrying out surgical strikes against us, I won't believe that it is that sort of war. This will not stand, they can not win. The sort of war in the bible, I would be standing out front with my hunting rifles right now gunning down an invasion.
People are comparing this disaster to the bombing of Peal Harbor by the Japanese. That was a bad time to be a Japanese American. I understand they were sent to interrment camps. It's just as well becuase if they had been outside the camps they might have been lynched.
Now is not a good time to be of Arabian descent. I haven't heard anything yet, but I predict there will be murder.
Also, politicians are debating on television how to balance the principles of the bill of rights with the threat that is facing us today. What are they calling for, if not interrment camps.
I am certain it will be bad. I know that foriegners are about to suffer, but will it become to bad that I will be forced to withold my liberal views for fear of violent retaliation?
Too busy staying alive... ~ R.A.
You are on the right course. It's a JIHAD.
Please stop with the facetious "but the US earned it" comments. Any large-scale power acts in its own self interest. That is just as true today as it was 2000+ years ago when Rome sowed the remains of Carthage, their mortal enemy, with salt. Smaller groups act in their self interest as well - the "recent unpleasantness" in Zimbabwe over land seizures is an excellent case in point. That my self interest may not be your self interest is an entirely normal state of affairs - most affairs of state are zero-sum games. Despite the complaints from around the world about American hegemonism, most of those counries who now use the UN as a forum to complain regularly and bitterly, would not have had access to such a venue if it were not for American desires. The League of Nations was largely an American creation, and the UN was based on the same principles, shoved down the throats of unwilling and relatively ungrateful Europeans.
Or is this the old "blame the victim" game, legitimized because the victim happens to be big? Does that mean that my 5'2" wife should go out and start pistol-whipping NFL linebackers? They're bigger, meaner, and nastier, so they must have it coming.
The UN and the Western World decided to create an artificial state in Palestine,
As opposed to what? The rump state left behind when the Ottoman Empire fell apart? Remember - the Ottoman Empire held all of the Mid-East until the end of WW1. Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, all of the Saudi peninsula states - all of these countries were born on the ashes of the Ottoman Empire. Greece didn't get its freedom all that much earier, either. Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Albania, Austria, and most of Southeastern Europe all come from similar bastard progeny - the old Austro-Hungarian empire. What about Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Finland - all formerly parts of the Russian Empire, freed by the fall of the Tsars. Are they just as illegitimate?
and billions of US dollars flow into an oppresive regime to suppress the native Palestinians.
Native? Really? I thought they arrived after the Romans pushed the Jews out, in about 100 AD. If you want to play the "prior posession" game, Palestinians are relative latecomers. Prior art, in this case, goes to the Jews, whether you like it or not. You can use the argument that the Jews are returning, and that the Palestinians have 1800 years of posession, but if that's the case, then you might as well turn around and tell every Native American that they don't have a legitimate claim either - whether the time is 50, 100, 200, or 1800 years doesn't really make a difference, it's whoever was second to last, by your logic.
What am I saying here? Review ALL of the facts before you make such sweeping statements. Apply your arguments evenhandedly - the law applies to all, not just to some.
This is a nation-state-level act of war. The deliberate, pre-meditated murder of >10,000 individuals. The destruction of $billions of personnal property. IMHO, once the perpetrator(s) behind this are determined, whichever government is harboring them and their operation should be requested to hand them and their operation over, all giftwrapped with pretty bows, for criminal prosecution. Failure to do so would demonstrate conspiracy after the fact by the national government in an act of war. My personal choice would be to see those responsible charged, in criminal court in the district of Manhattan, state of New York, with 10,000 1st degree murder charges. Presuming they are found guilty, I would like to see them serve those sentances consecutively. I would like to see _every single individual_ in the sponsoring organizations similarly arrested and charged with 10,000 counts of conspiracy to commit murder.
So there's no country to go to war with. It's another mess like Bosnia. There are 25 million people in an area the size of Texas, some of whom hate the US and some who don't. Now what?
Really? I saw a blast sequence. I just saw a news clip of an up close up of a different angle I havent seen all day. Look closely as the first building falls. You can see a train of blasts falling AHEAD of the falling cloud of smoke.
like what happens when professionals level buildings.
I think the design engineers are correct, the WTC CAN survive a jet plane flying to it.. But *nothing* can stand up to a professional demolition job.
-tried to make an account it didn't seem to like me
--anyway--
---selsynNO@3phaseSPAM.org
----DJselsyn-->http://www.3phase.org/notron
I believe it is you who is out of touch with American foreign policy. You see, we provide weapons to Israel. Israel then uses those weapons to attack Palestine. In some recent cases, being so bold as to launch air-to-surface missles at cars in order to kill the drivers or attack houses in inhabited areas. If you really think that Palestinians who watch their people being attacked and killed by American-made helicopters and jets hate us because we are rich, you need to pay more attention. Not that any of this justifies todays events. But, Palestinians have quite valid reasons for disliking the US. And, as a democrocy, we do bear responsibility for the actions of our leaders. So perhaps you should pay more attention to what our leaders are doing in our name and vote accordingly.
"All the activities of Osama bin Laden are under the tight control of the Taliban," Usman Shaharyar, a Taliban foreign ministry official, told The Associated Press.
www.bergen.com/morenews/osama25200106248.htm
From a newspaper article on June 25th.
The Taliban seems to belive that bin Laden did not, and would not have had the capability to, perform these terrorist attacks. Are they right? Does bin Laden have them fooled? Are they willing accomplises? Does bin Laden's popularity with the Afgani people cause the Taliban to belive that moving against him would collapse their fragile hold on the country? I'm sure we'll find out more as the investigation continues.
If it turns out, as it is now being reported, that "box cutter" knives were the weapons used to take control of the plane then the sophistication needed to have pulled this coordinated terror attack would not have been as high as originally thought*. It would, however, have required considerable "out of the box" thinking by the terrorists. It seems the most dangerous weapon in the terrorist's arsenal is creativity.
* It would still almost certainly have required the terrorists themselves to be able to pilot the aircraft, and that would certainly have required some sophisticated training; but without the need to smuggle weapons on board all the planes simultaneously, the logistics of this act become MUCH simpler.
Funny thing is, The US will attack who ever did this. And the civilians of that country will be asking the same question you did.
I call this concept 'war' and it's a silly waste of human life. But it seems to be ok if the waste of life is the 'bad guys'.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
As the baader meinhof boys said, "The greater the atrocity, the greater the value." You are utterly naive if you don't understand why the killing of innocents is justified to these people, and far preferable to the killing of soldiers.
Yes, I mourn for the loss of life. But not greatly. I've lost too many family members these past two years to feel sincere grief for strangers. This incident is only outstanding for it's location and it photogenic nature. It will not be helped by me pretending to be touched, like the drama queens who are flooding this site. The reactions I'm seeing are the reactions of people whose lives have made them so numb, that when a major incident takes place they feel alive again, and begin to crave more disaster.
Did you know it is a common practice in parts of Africa to crack holes in fuel pipelines to steal petroleum? Did you know that this often results in huge explosions? These explosions often kill thousands -- literally thousands -- of africans. If I go through my life feeling soulful grief for those whose lives are foreshortened by incomprehensible catastrophe, I will be paralysed.
Innocent people die. Get used to it. The US has never been squeamish about murdering innocents. Over 2000 civilians died in Panama.
Denial isn't just a river in Italy
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This has got to stop. Islam, at least as far as I understand it, is a religion of peace and devotion . Just look at the tens of millions of the true Islamics, the decent American citizens who love this land and in times of crisis like this unfaitly bear the brunt of our typical narrow-minded hostilities. Our tendency to blame an entire culture for the actions of one nut indicates that we're still carrying Segrigationist-era prejudices.
Fanatics like Osama bin Laden and what I fear to be a growing proportion of the Arab world follow a bastardized and corrupt version of Islam that somehow justifies horrendous atrocities like September 11th--I think a New York Times columnist called it Islamism, the -ism to indicate it's juvenile delinquency.
Islamism, Islamist, Islamistic. Let's adopt this term and end an injustice against our fellow Americans.
"[T]he single essential element on which all discoveries will be dependent is human freedom." -- Barry Goldwater
I wouldn't think much expertise would be needed as long as the hijackers don't have to take off themselves, then they could force the pilots to navigate towards NY and when close enough kill the pilots and take over the controls. Read this BBC article:
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
I'm an engineer and i was rather surprised they held up from the initial hit. Especially after viewing some of the different angles, where the 2nd plane almost hits towards the outside edge of the building. I'm sure there would've been some load-bearing columns in there.
It may have been designed to withstand a passenger jet hit. 1) But planes have gotten bigger since the mid-60s when construction started. 2) Nothing is fail-proof. Especially in this scenario, where the plane's direction and velocity are variables.
You're probably right about the heat. But also, the fire suppression system was water-based - which if activated would've spread the jet fuel around the building. (like throwing water on a grease fire)
Tom
This is hard to say but I feel like I have to say something.
It goes without saying that this has been a terrible day.
The loss of life, and a horrible way to die.
However, I'm even more terrible than the acts of terrorism
are the possible reactions to these acts.
We cannot afford to become reactionary. We cannot afford to lose
our heads. I overhead some co-workers making racist comments today.
Being multi-ethic and Jewish that rather upset me. Well, I don't
have to be Jewish to be intolerant of racial prejudice, but it does
make me feel even more threatened since some people are equally
racist against Jews as Arabs and Muslims. So I take it personally.
Anyway, above all, as Americans in this crisis,
_WE NEED TO KEEP OUR HEADS_
This is a crisis but we must not let our emotions get out of control
or the reaction will be worse than what happened today.
At the very least we need to wait for due process of law and
have proof of who really committed these atrocities. We cannot tolerate
harassment and violence against ethnic minorities who may be blamed.
If it does turn out that the Osama Bin Ladin is responsible for this
that we cannot tolerate the bombing of civilian populations in Afghanistan.
The Taliban is a fascist government. Many of the Afghanistan people
are against the Taliban but they do not exactly have the same freedoms
of free speech and assembly that we enjoy in this country. Bombing
civilian targets in Afghanistan, or Iraq, or Yugoslavia etc. etc. etc.
is just as bad as the atrocities American experienced today.
Understand that the mainstream corporate media does not widely report
what our government has done to countries around the world. Also consider
that our government is partially responsible for placing the Taliban in
power by supporting them during the Soviet Union's war with Afghanistan.
Most likely the terrorists who committed these atrocities today
are only out for revenge. They have no other motive and they feel
like they have nothing to lose. We cannot win a war against small
groups of people who are only out for revenge. We need to think
very thoroughly about the calls to war and what it will really mean.
This has been a terrible terrible day. History might show this to be
a day of great change. Now we must decide whether that change will
be for better or for worse. We need to mourn our losses. I hope
that I can appeal to our better nature. That we as Americans will
not give into the madness of this terrible day. I hope that we will
rally around the call for peace instead of the call for revenge
that would be the downfall of us all.
I know that some may take my statements as derogatory.
Please think about what I have said. While I am critical of
some of the actions of our government, I do love this country.
I say what I say is because despite what has happened today
and in the past I still hope for the best.
My prayers go out for the victims, their friends and family,
the spirit of our country, and for the entire world.
This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
Does anyone else remember an airliner going down "without reason" and the pilot was spouting Islamic yadda-yadda on the black box? It was clear-air, no ceiling, beautiful day. I'm guessing they wanted to see if anyone could stop a 'lamakazi' from taking the plane down, or if it'd be stopped by automatic controls or some other source. Does this ring a bell?
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
Besides the suspects mentioned in one of the links, (3 mentioned: Palestinian group, Iraq, Osama), I think a fourth should not be ruled out in advance. Right extremist americans (i.e. T. McVeigh followers).
I intend to live forever, so far so good.
No shit?
Americans probably won't find this very comforting right now, but I'll give a short newsbreak: Unless you haven't noticed, you are in war, have been for a long time!
Look, for the last 50 years, Americans have been bombing cities here and there all over the world, leaving hundreds of thousands if not millions people dead, charred, mothers and brothers wailing over their graves. Sure, Americans were always the good guys, and sure, American bombs only killed soldiers. But hey, even innocent people do die in wars. America just got it first civilian casualties in 50 years!
So, we can now wait to see how the American reaction will be different from the reaction of those rag-head mad-dog arabs, who cry for eternal revenge after their relatives have been killed and homes bombed to ground.
Really, get over it.
Even more panic and havoc could have been caused by spreading some nasty infectious diseases. Viruses keep killing indefinitely, and with an incubation period. You don't even know if you've got it until you break out. This would cause _real_ panic. The West Nile virus caused some panic, and it's barely a threat at all. Imagine Ebola outbreaks on a couple stock traders who'd been in the stock exchange that day...
This terrorist attack hit symbols of power, and killed a couple thousand people. I just hope that nobody tossed some Anthrax or something into the mix. We won't know for a while whether any bio-weapons were used, because of the incubation period.
Terrorist threats are the major threat to the world these days, AFAIK. None of them would be insane enough to use ICBMs, because they couldn't deny involvement very easily if the missile was launched from their base. Screw missile defence. (It's not useless, since a missile could be fired by accident or something. I just don't think it's worth the money it would cost, and that that money could be better spent on health care and stuff.)
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,
> Everyone claims that this was sophisticated, planned for months, etc.
That's exactly what I thought when I heard the dudes on the news going on about how this attack required massive amounts of resources, etc. I have no idea how they justify that. They talk about it as if that fact were self-evident. Just because it killed a lot of people doesn't mean it required a lot of resources.
If I was trying to pull this off, I'd get four groups of hijackers. We'd try to get some stuff we could use as weapons onto the planes. We'd call each other on cell phones to make sure all four planes were ready for hijacking. If not, try again the next day. If we were ready, just take over and fly the planes into something important. How is this hard? With an internet connection, a laptop, and good encryption, the authorities wouldn't have a clue.
I'm not actually a terrorist, so maybe I'm missing something here... The only thing I can think of is that maybe you would need a big organization to get enough suicide hijackers, and ones who could fly as well. With parachutes, some of the hijackers might even figure out a way to pull it off and survive.
The only way to defend against this kind of thing once the plane is hijacked is to have SAM sites protecting important buildings. I don't think you could scramble fighters fast enough, unless you have a huge no-fly zone over your important buildings.
#define X(x,y) x##y
Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes ,
Even one well-trained and armed security guard on each plane - preferably incognito - would be sufficient to make such an attack very difficult, if not impossible. Also pilots need to be able to defend themselves.
If the airlines can pay for 10 flight attendants, then paying for one extra person shouldn't make a huge difference to their operating costs.
Given that screening does not work, it's the only thing to do.
"that smart and that well-organized"
You will need:
1 or 2 people per plane.
A knife or gun each.
Errrr, thats it.
America has many enemies. Why wouldnt they celebrate? If you were in Iraq during the bombing, surely you`re not suggesting you`d be walking around with a long face on? Get over it. The only thing you can really do, apart from an israeli style tit-for-tat `rapid response`, which doesnt seem to be exactly calming the situation down, is to find out why people are so mad at America that they are prepared to kill themselves.
"All you need is love" John Lennon.....
/. really kept the lines open!
Hope nothing else goes down,Grab some sleep if you can. Tomorrow I'm gonna finish this old farmers truck so he can get groceries. I'll have a wake for all those poor souls when it's time and I'm gonna go back to work and help a few people keep it together. I'm not going to give up one day to fear or hate. God bless the US
Right on
I must say that I fully disagree with what has happened in the US at the moment. It was a cowardly and evil act of terrorism.
I do however think that comparisons to Pearl Harbor are a bit off base.
Pearl Harbor was a military target, the WTC was a civilian target.
I'm also not saying that it is payback or justice for what happened in Hiroshima.
I just think that a better comparison than Pearl Harbor is a comparison to Hiroshima.
So you are suggesting a nutter with a knife could have taken on the other nutter with a knife. So the solution is that there are no security checks and arm all the passengers.
The solutions is to monitor internal flights in the same way that they are required to monitor international flights. US internal security sucks, plain and simple. This disaster was created by the US consumer and the airlines desire for cheap hassle free flights. Prices must rise to pay for the security required.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
First of all, I am sorry for all those who have become a victim in any way to these attacks. Said that...
1. Defenetely, these attacks were counterstrikes to US politics in Middle East and Europe.
2. I strongly disagree with Bush claiming these attacks being "cowardly acts". I think, that organizing and implementing such plan takes extreme courage, even if performed by a mad man, which I don't think is a case. One should have a clear head to plan all this.
3. Targets are defenetly symbolic - world's economy center, "world's" military center. Both destroyed within one day, showing that US is not actually such a strong giant as many may think.
4. Responding fast is doubtly even half a deal. It's like saying "I respawn very fast in Q3". I get killed in the first place anyway.
5. It is shocking to which extent of globaliztion US can go... as usual... everything shut down nationwide...
6. Counterstrike from US will cause only more attacks. US is still too powerfull to fight in open space, especially by small countries.
...once again, I am sorry for all those who became a victim...
Leonid Mamtchenkov
It seems to me that this could have been prevented by any number of simple precautions on the part of the airlines.
Hijackings have been a real threat for deecades, yet there has been little done to planes to make it difficult. security in airports has gone up, but once onboar, security is nearly non-existant.
How to be more secure without unduly troubling passengers?
-Isolate the cabin. On takeoff, the pilot, copilot and navigator are locked in. Remodel the plane a little so they have a micro-fridge and a toilet. Or, the pilots simply use a different door to enter the plane. If hijackers have to go through a bulkhead to reach the controls, they'll have a lot harder time of it.
-Prepare the crew. Train random (or volunteer) stedardess in armed and unarmed combat. Train and certify pilots the same way you would a security guard, and issue them a sidearm. Rather than being helpless victims, flight crews can be proactive.
-Plainclothes safety marshalls. Armed security personnel ride random flights providing for uncertainty in the minds of hijackers. Will this flight be easy? Or will it be "Passenger 57"?
-Pilot's Panic button/silent alarm. The pilot presses the button, starting a broadcast of black box info, audio/video cockpit monitors, and automatically switches control to a ground station. All this happens silently and instantly.
-And finally, more vigilant security at airports. A larger security force, cycling through positions will be more effective than a smaller force assigned to the same posts, day after day. If 50 people setting off the metal detector forget their keys, #51 probably did, too. Right?
After all, nothing happened yesterday. Complacency is the greatest friend of any criminal.
Anyway, these are just my ideas to prevent this kind of horror from happening again. Take 'em or leave 'em.
Hannan Ashrawi (sp???), former Palestinian spokeswoman back when it seemed the peace talks were going somewhere, but since not seen as often in public anymore because she disagrees with the way Arafat is running the Palestinian Authority, just spoke on CNN about the "Palestinians dancing in the street" footage we've all seen.
She claimed the people shown celebrating and dancing are a *very* small minority group and do not in any way represent Palestinians as a whole. Moreover, though small groups of people may have been celebrating when they heard America was hit, celebrations soon subsided when it became clear that possibly thousands had been killed. The general attitude in the West Bank and Gaza is one of horror, disgust and sympathy with American victims.
Bear in mind that Ashrawi (I really should've looked this up, sorry) is one of the most moderate Palestinians around and that she's also one of very few Palestinians with some authority who's got any idea about pr Western style (as in, she knows it's not a good idea to scream "I will sacrifice *all* of my sons for Allah to make Israel suffer the way we suffer" when a suicide bomber's just blown up a kiddie disco in Tel Aviv - it doesn't do the Palestinian cause any good in the Western eye) so she's bound to say something like this.
However, if you think about it, she may, partly, be right. I myself have only seen that footage with the guy handing out free food to passersby (you know which footage I mean). Consider that in the 22 hrs since it happened, there hasn't been any new footage of Palestinians dancing in the street. It's always the same clip. If this celebration was going on on any substantial scale, I should think we would've seen more footage of it.
Disclaimer: I'm not Palestinian, nor am I Israeli, nor am I sympathetic to either cause (in the sense that I don't believe either people should be destroyed to give the other Lebensraum)
News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/
According to this statement from a senator, the american people should forgo a few freedoms to insure security. Big Brother is COMING PEOPLE!!
" ``This is a war situation we're in,'' Sen. Charles Grassley (news - bio - voting record), R-Iowa, said, adding that Tuesday's tragedy likely would alter Americans' sense of security and lead them to forgo some freedoms for added safety in the future. "
Its tragic what happened, but our freedoms are about to be tested and/or removed.
Actually, they believe the White House was a target but apparently it's difficult to discern from the air AND it has SAM implacements on the roof :)
It is believed that the Pentagon was a secondary target and MUCH easier to see from the air.
Reportedly $37 billion to the NSA alone. Yes, more than education, more than NASA, more than everything except (uniformed) defence and health.
But bear in mind that US agencies, even the MiB ones, are limited in their responses. Even if they think that they know something is going down, they have strict rules of engagement that prevent them taking the Israeli route of torturing suspects, or just assasinating people when there's any probably cause that they're planning action.
Also, the CIA in particular has been under strict regulations since 1995 that make it hard for them to plant or use agents within foreign organisations. They are choked with red tape.
Should we give the NSA and CIA carte blanche to take preventative action (read: kill people , both foreign and domestic, just in case they're planning something)? Last week, I'd have said "No way!". Now, it's not so clear.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
You're close. The actual number of people required is eight. One person distracts while the other kills the pilot. Then the distractor stands guard at the door, reassuring all the passengers while the killer pilots the plane into the designated area. This act could have been accomplished by eight very determined terrorists. Consider this when you cry out for the blood of thousands of innocent muslims.
The wickedness and awesome cruelty of a crushed and humiliated people
... all these must be obscured lest they provide the smallest fractional reason for yesterday's mass savagery.
By Robert Fisk
12 September 2001
So it has come to this. The entire modern history of the Middle East the collapse of the Ottoman empire, the Balfour declaration, Lawrence of Arabia's lies, the Arab revolt, the foundation of the state of Israel, four Arab-Israeli wars and the 34 years of Israel's brutal occupation of Arab land all erased within hours as those who claim to represent a crushed, humiliated population struck back with the wickedness and awesome cruelty of a doomed people. Is it fair is it moral to write this so soon, without proof, when the last act of barbarism, in Oklahoma, turned out to be the work of home-grown Americans? I fear it is. America is at war and, unless I am mistaken, many thousands more are now scheduled to die in the Middle East, perhaps in America too. Some of us warned of "the explosion to come''. But we never dreamt this nightmare.
And yes, Osama bin Laden comes to mind, his money, his theology, his frightening dedication to destroy American power. I have sat in front of bin Laden as he described how his men helped to destroy the Russian army in Afghanistan and thus the Soviet Union. Their boundless confidence allowed them to declare war on America. But this is not the war of democracy versus terror that the world will be asked to believe in the coming days. It is also about American missiles smashing into Palestinian homes and US helicopters firing missiles into a Lebanese ambulance in 1996 and American shells crashing into a village called Qana and about a Lebanese militia paid and uniformed by America's Israeli ally hacking and raping and murdering their way through refugee camps.
No, there is no doubting the utter, indescribable evil of what has happened in the United States. That Palestinians could celebrate the massacre of 20,000, perhaps 35,000 innocent people is not only a symbol of their despair but of their political immaturity, of their failure to grasp what they had always been accusing their Israeli enemies of doing: acting disproportionately. All the years of rhetoric, all the promises to strike at the heart of America, to cut off the head of "the American snake'' we took for empty threats. How could a backward, conservative, undemocratic and corrupt group of regimes and small, violent organisations fulfil such preposterous promises? Now we know.
And in the hours that followed yesterday's annihilation, I began to remember those other extraordinary assaults upon the US and its allies, miniature now by comparison with yesterday's casualties. Did not the suicide bombers who killed 241 American servicemen and 100 French paratroops in Beirut on 23 October 1983, time their attacks with unthinkable precision?
There were just seven seconds between the Marine bombing and the destruction of the French three miles away. Then there were the attacks on US bases in Saudi Arabia, and last year's attempt almost successful it now turns out to sink the USS Cole in Aden. And then how easy was our failure to recognise the new weapon of the Middle East which neither Americans nor any other Westerners could equal: the despair-driven, desperate suicide bomber.
And there will be, inevitably, and quite immorally, an attempt to obscure the historical wrongs and the injustices that lie behind yesterday's firestorms. We will be told about "mindless terrorism'', the "mindless" bit being essential if we are not to realise how hated America has become in the land of the birth of three great religions.
Ask an Arab how he responds to 20,000 or 30,000 innocent deaths and he or she will respond as decent people should, that it is an unspeakable crime. But they will ask why we did not use such words about the sanctions that have destroyed the lives of perhaps half a million children in Iraq, why we did not rage about the 17,500 civilians killed in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon. And those basic reasons why the Middle East caught fire last September the Israeli occupation of Arab land, the dispossession of Palestinians, the bombardments and state-sponsored executions
No, Israel was not to blame though we can be sure that Saddam Hussein and the other grotesque dictators will claim so but the malign influence of history and our share in its burden must surely stand in the dark with the suicide bombers. Our broken promises, perhaps even our destruction of the Ottoman Empire, led inevitably to this tragedy. America has bankrolled Israel's wars for so many years that it believed this would be cost-free. No longer so. But, of course, the US will want to strike back against "world terror'', and last night's bombardment of Kabul may have been the opening salvo. Indeed, who could ever point the finger at Americans now for using that pejorative and sometimes racist word "terrorism''?
Eight years ago, I helped to make a television series that tried to explain why so many Muslims had come to hate the West. Last night, I remembered some of those Muslims in that film, their families burnt by American-made bombs and weapons. They talked about how no one would help them but God. Theology versus technology, the suicide bomber against the nuclear power. Now we have learnt what this means.
I do not know what the government knew about the terrorists. The FBI did raid an ISP in Richardson TX that was operated by Muslims and physically located in or near the main Dallas TX area Mosque. Several Muslim families protested this raid of what they called a pure business ISP, with no connection to terrorists. The Mosque has been there some time, and I, a Baptist, have bought books from the associated book store, which is a convenient source of Islamic literature operated by Mulism ladies. Neither the Mosque nor the bookstore present even a hint of association with Muslim radicals.
http://www.rcc.ryerson.ca/ccf/news/unique/am_tex t. html
How about Mossad? An effective way to eliminate your enemy is to get another nation pissed-off at them...
You're using her as bait, Master!
Non-experts like you talking out of their asses are just further confusing this issue. Note I'm not claiming to be any kid of expert - I'm just quoting the people who have some kind of relevant experience. Go to f-in CNN if you wan the details.
I wish to hell all you armchair commandos would stop blowing smoke about how easy this was. This was a very sophisticated military action and the sooner we abandon the isolated terrorist cell theory as the most viable option and start looking at the military reality (hint - only one nation has basically condemned the US and fully supported the action. Ends with a Q? anyone? Anyone?)
It Is the Nature of Information to Transgress Artificial Boundaries
I sent this to my friends:
_________________
Everyone,
As is often the case, the Economist seems to have the best story: America under Attack
Also see The Economist front page
Stratfor provides interesting and more complete analysis.
Lax Security One of the important points made in the article is that security in U.S. airports and on U.S. airplanes before the bombing was lax compared to the security in Europe.
George Bush had Increased Support for Israel. The Economist article does not mention that the Bush Administration in the U.S. had recently increased its support for the Israeli government and therefore also Israeli violence. The Clinton administration, in contrast, was more careful not to do things which could be interpreted as an incitement to violence.
Once again, intelligence agencies were useless. It is amazing to me that "intelligence" authorities claim that they did not have any idea that there would be an attack like this. Below is a link to an album cover from a band called "The Coup". It is black American "Party Music". The album was sold long before today's bombing. The album cover shows both towers of the World Trade Center in New York in flames:
The Coup -- Party Music, album cover shows the World Trade Center towers burning.
If black rap artists can have this idea, why didn't the intelligence agencies have it? The idea was not particularly innovative, since the World Trade Center had already been bombed once. Did the intelligence agencies think that those who did it would just stop trying?
From one of the Stratfor articles: "Reuters is reporting that Arabic satellite television channel MBC warned Sept. 8 that followers of suspected Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden were planning a major attack on U.S. and Israeli interests in the next two weeks."
Violence is Assumed. Commentators on three of the largest U.S. TV networks, NBC, CBS, and ABC, have made comments that assume without debate that the U.S. will engage in military action in retaliation. One U.S. senator said on TV that the U.S. response should be comparable to the U.S. response to the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor. One of the U.S. responses at the time of Pearl Harbor was to be the only country that has ever used nuclear weapons. Is the senator suggesting that?
This is my reply to the many people who are recommending violence as an answer to violence:
Do you have any thought that violence in retaliation might be a mistake, and might just invite further violence? Those who say no may change their minds after they consider the following issues:
The U.S. government (not necessarily the U.S. people) has a history of thinking that violence is the answer. The U.S. government killed 2,100,000 people in Vietnam and maybe 150,000 people in Iraq. The U.S. has bombed 14 countries in 30 years, killing a roughly estimated 3,000,000 people. None of the people who were killed were in any way directly threatening the U.S. These people had mothers and fathers, friends and families and wives.
Most of the citizens of the U.S. had, and have, no idea of the beliefs of the people that their government killed. Most people in the U.S. cannot even locate the countries the U.S. government bombed on a map of the world. People cannot be thought to have chosen violence when they do not come close to understanding the issues. It is often the government that chooses violence, not the people.
No matter how violent a country is, or how many people a violent country kills, there is still an inexhaustible supply of people in other countries who also want to engage in violence. Violence can be unending. Do you want that?
No matter how angry you are, there are thousands of people who are more angry than you. Do you want them to attack you?
As was mentioned above, the Bush administration recently increased U.S. support for the violence of the Israelis. This was sure to make the people being killed by the Israelis unhappy. Do you find it surprising that some of them are motivated to violence also?
There are many countries where people are severely distressed by Israeli violence. Recently there was a TV news story about street violence in which Israelis were killed. The Israeli counter-attack was shown on TV: A helicopter fired rockets at a building, causing huge explosions. It is not important in this instance whether the Israelis are the aggressors. What is important is that a significant number of people in the world think they are the aggressors.
The problems between the Jews and the Arabs have existed for 3,300 years. The Jews say that they are the "chosen people" of God. The Jews say that Arabs are descended from an illegitimate child of their tribal founder, Abraham, and a slave girl.
It is not difficult to understand the thoughts of the Arabs. It is not difficult to understand that it is annoying to live next to a group of people who claim that they are superior, and that Arabs are inferior. It is not difficult to understand that it is annoying to live near people who claim that you are a descendent of a bastard and that God doesn't like you as much.
It is also not difficult to understand that the constant claims of the Jews of superiority over everyone else (including people of European descent like me) are mentally de-centering to Arabs who happen to be psychologically conflicted.
Violence is caused by mentally de-centered people. Mentally de-centered people engage in violence. It's that simple. Being violent toward them makes mentally de-centered people even more mentally de-centered. That's why violence is not a good answer to violence.
The U.S., and all those who hate violence, should take very strong action. But the action must be designed to cure the problem of highly-conflicted, mentally de-centered people. Whatever that response is, it must be more sophisticated than violence.
The terrorists are extreme examples of mentally disturbed people. Remember that those who crashed airplanes into the buildings cannot possibly benefit from their own actions. They are dead. Someone who is willing to commit suicide is about as mentally de-centered as it is possible to be.
Does the U.S. really have a place in a dispute that began 3,100 years before the founding of the country? How many people here really understand this dispute? What percentage of the citizens of the U.S. can even find Israel on a map of the world? I think the percentage is low.
I find the arrogance of my Jewish friends annoying, too. However, there are many differences between myself and the terrorists. I am less conflicted. I am better educated. It doesn't matter to me what other people have been saying for thousands of years; I don't believe Jews actually are superior. I don't live in an area where I am at risk of being killed by Israelis. I am not Arab, so I am not the target of the strongest claims of Jews that they are superior.
I can also understand why Jews would find Arabs annoying. There is an element of the Arab culture that allows Arabs to think that lies are sometimes acceptable. My Arab friends have sometimes lied to me over trivial issues. To someone who values careful thought, lies are extremely repugnant.
Should we be giving Israel money when that will be seen as us a choosing to enter a 3,300 year-old conflict? The U.S. government gives billions of dollars every year to Israel. If anything, this money seems to have made Israel weaker. The Israelis have spent money they didn't earn; this is always a corrupting influence; they have had problems with inflation. It can hardly be said that the people of the U.S. give the money; most have no idea that money is going to Israel. So, the people pay the money, but the government gives it away. Rightly or wrongly, sensibly or crazily, the Arabs see this money as encouragement of Israel's violence toward them.
On this particular issue both cultures are crazy! They've been killing each other since the time of the Pharaohs! What does this have to do with the U.S.? Do we walk into bars and take part in any fight that is happening there?
The U.S. has a history of secret interference with the governments of other countries. We often hear about secret activities of the U.S. government after it is too late to object. The U.S. supported the killing of president Mossadegh of Iran, and then supported an extremely weak man, the Shah of Iran. (See Iran 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings) [thirdworldtraveler.com], for example.) This provoked a revolution in Iran that was hostile to the United States. Citizens of the U.S. were kept hostage.
The U.S. secret agencies' secret answer to the anti-U.S. sentiment was to support Saddam Hussein of Iraq against Iran. We supported Saddam Hussein's violent war against Iran. However, when Saddam Hussein became violent toward another country in the region, we spent billions of dollars to kill an estimated 150,000 Iraqis and destroy their property.
When executives do things openly they make lots of mistakes, and are sometimes held accountable, usually in a very peaceful way, and usually by their own staffs. When executives do things in secret, there is little accountability, and the mistakes can become huge.
Anyone interested in the activities of secret U.S. agencies may have been interested in a segment of the CBS show "60 Minutes" about the secret involvement of former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in the killing of Chilean General Rene Schneider. The show aired on Sunday, September 9, 2001. General Schneider was a strong supporter of democracy. Here are links to information about U.S. interference with democracy in Chile:
National Security Archive Chile Documentation Project [gwu.edu]
PBS News Hour: "... evidence of a policy to undermine democracy in Chile and to support dictatorship there" [pbs.org]
Hinchey Report, CIA Activities in Chile [state.gov]
Iran, Iraq, and Chile are just three of the countries that have suffered from secret U.S. involvement. There is some discussion of U.S. government interference in Saudi Arabia below. Also, don't forget Nicaragua. I asked someone who went to Nicaragua during U.S. involvement there whether it was possible to see the wealth that the U.S. government was pouring into that small country. The amount was said to be about $1,000,000 per day. I was told, no, there was no evidence of the money that was spent.
There is a cycle: 1) The U.S. government influences other governments in hidden ways, including arranging the killing of foreign leaders. 2) Some members of the countries with whom the U.S. has interfered want to retaliate violently to the violence of the U.S. 3) The U.S. uses the violent retaliation as a justification for more hidden activity.
Invading countries and killing the residents and destroying their property is not a way of relating I consider socially skilled. Why do the citizens of one country think they can kill the citizens of another? If killing is the answer, can't the U.S. ask a better question?
The interference in the affairs of other countries by the secret U.S. agencies has prompted some people to retaliate. These people who retaliate are called "terrorists" in the U.S. The terrorists make everyone in the U.S. less safe. So, U.S. citizens have, in some ways, gotten less security for the money they spent on secret activities.
The violent attitude toward people outside the U.S. has, predictably, spread to the internal police forces in the U.S. When some religious fanatics decided to do stupid things in Waco, Texas, the U.S. government responded by bringing in very violent-minded people. The result was that people were killed.
There were people who didn't like the activities of the U.S. police forces in Waco. There were people who were psychologically de-centered by these activities. One of them, Timothy McVeigh, bombed a U.S. government building in Oklahoma. So then the U.S. government killed him.
Secrecy encourages people not to trust. Violence encourages violence.
We tend to hear about the activities of secret U.S. government agencies about 30 years after they occur. What are they doing now?
It is 10:00 o'clock. Do you know what the U.S. government is doing? No, it is a fact that you don't. You don't know any other time, either. You cannot even know how much of your money is spent on secret activities, because the budget for secret U.S. government agencies is hidden in other appropriations.
Definition of a terrorist: The other country's CIA.
There is in the U.S. very little attempt at understanding other cultures. Arab friends of mine have described situations in Saudi Arabia that are extremely volatile. Apparently Osama bin Laden, and many average Saudis who live in the U.S., feel very unhappy with U.S. influence in Saudi Arabia. They think that there should be political parties and democracy in Saudi Arabia. However, the U.S. government strongly supports the dictatorial regime of the house of Al Saud. Residents of Saudi Arabia, for example, are not allowed to leave the country without an exit visa. They are potentially prisoners of their own country.
Why not ask ourselves why Osama bin Laden is willing to go to so much trouble to promote terrorism? Maybe we would learn something. I am NOT saying Osama bin Laden is right about anything, and definitely his violence is reprehensible. Nevertheless it may help to understand him. According to Arabs to whom I've talked, there is considerable good reason to be dissatisfied with the secret actions of the U.S. government.
As other people have said in the past, the U.S. government has a history of supporting corrupt dictatorships. The U.S. government supported Pakistan against India! India is the world's most populous democracy. It has been suggested that the preference for supporting dictatorships is due to U.S. government corruption. A dictator is almost certain to be willing to support embezzlement of U.S. government money, and to keep it secret. Trying to arrange embezzlement would be very dangerous in a democracy because of the danger of being discovered.
Under the stress of conflict, people show how they truly think. It has always annoyed me that people who call themselves Christian often reveal that they don't really believe in the important messages of Christianity, and that they don't even understand those messages.
Basically, Jesus Christ's idea of not returning violence with violence means that we can vigorously protect ourselves, but that any response must be the true minimum necessary to achieve security. This is a theory that can be recommended even to the majority of people in the world who are not Christian. The theory seems to fit the facts. The facts seem to be that violence always has severely negative side-effects that overwhelm any effect that might be seen as positive.
Answers? Prevention is an answer. Better understanding is an answer. Being charitable long before any problems begin occurring is a good answer. And maybe there are times when we just don't know the answer.
There is often considerable misunderstanding about non-violent methods. One reason to suggest non-violent methods is that they can be extremely powerful. For example, suppose that representatives from the U.S. knew Osama bin Laden's family. Or suppose that you understood how money is transferred to bin Laden. Or suppose the U.S. was so well-liked in the region that bin Laden had difficulty finding supporters. One of the values of non-violent methods is that literally hundreds of them are available, and many of them are far, far cheaper than violence.
The desire for non-violence is a desire to be extremely powerful. Those who are really powerful can have a strong influence just by voicing disapproval.
There are many people who support violence because they want to act out their own personal anger, while at the same time hiding their internal conflict from themselves. It is a fact that such people would be FAR more comfortable if they could be helped to understand and take responsibility for their anger. Acting out anger is like a drug. It provides only temporary relief, and it makes the person who does it more angry. Having un-recognized anger is like carrying a 100-pound sack of cement on your back wherever you go. Un-recognized anger drags you down 24 hours per day.
Violence is not a good answer to violence.
Regards,
Michael Jennings
Michael Jennings
P.O. Box 14491
Portland, OR 97293-0491
U.S.A.
E-Mail: M_Jennings@USA.com
This letter maybe sent to anyone by email without permission from the author, provided that no changes are made. If you print this article with no changes, you may give it to anyone you know. Other use requires permission. Copyright 2001.
Please mention errors and shortcomings to the author.
Bush's education improvements were