Home The Book Dr Articles Products Message Boards Journal Articles Search Our Surveys Surgery ESWT Dr Messages Find Good Drs video

.

Posted by anon on 9/12/01 at 17:45 (060016)

I have been saddened the last 24 hrs by the attack. It's an odd feeling. I am not concerned about my health, wealth, or happiness, nor about that of my friends and family. I am only a little more concerned about the 5,000 or so who died in NY yesterday than I am about the other 150,000 or so who died yesterday on our planet. I probably should be more saddened by the the WTC deaths because as an American I have a lot more in common with them. Only 5,000 or so other Americans died yesterday and these were mostly age-related so that their deaths were not as tragic.

There is a significant portion of the Arabic/Muslim population that is very happy to see our arrogance smited by this brilliant and amazing attack. It is no secret we are their enemy. We have long been at war with them and I hold no malice towards them for rejoicing in their victory. The backlash they will receive in the form of American hatred will probably be great and long-lasting and highly varied in its military, economic, and social forms. Certainly their race, culture, traditions, economies, and religion have just been dealt a very bad hand. There will be many relatively innocent Arabs/Muslims who's children will live in poverty as a result of this attack. I say 'relatively innocent' because I have known people of this tradition who are very kind and very Americanized, but still very happy to see Saddam stand up to us and were even saddened when he was defeated. There is a lot of quiet celebration we do not see. Their sympathy to the attackers' cause is a crucial part of what made the attack possible. They are not completely innocent. They can no more wash their hands of it than we can wash our hands of supporting Isreal. This is by their reasoning if not ours. There is not a particular person or government that is responsible for the attack. Given the tenants and insurers of the WTC, it was not even one nation that was attacked. It was the ideology and self-destructive arrogance of one tradition against another.

I commend the warriors who successfully killed so many of our people. As warrior-to-warrior, I am very happy for them and the pleasure they must have felt moments before their deaths, seeing the largest buildings of our
greatest city coming at them so quickly, knowing the amount of our own fuel that was on board. But I do not wish to see us celebrate in the deaths of their people. We should attack with devastating blows on all fronts without pleasure or malice but with a cold and neutral professionalism. We should not view it as revenge or even justice, but as a deterrent and cure, if not a business plan. An intelligent, science-based tradition will continue to win out over an emotional, religion-based tradition.

My sadness is not about the people who died nor about how it may affect me or my friends and family, but about how it has affected our country. Hopefully it has done a lot of good by possibly preventing or minimizing back-pack nuclear explosions in Washington D.C and Manhattan.

Re: .

Donna M on 9/12/01 at 18:47 (060028)

Some of what you say is....well another story.
The thing I see where you are really 'off base' is your last paragraph.
Our people, your friends and family, along with mine and everybody else's in this great country, including the innocent ones in yesterday's disaster, WE ARE AMERICA!!!! Our part of the country may be classified as America, but we, the citizens, are what make it the greatest country in the world. It's not the land, oceans, rivers, skyscrapers, etc. It is 'WE THE PEOPLE'.
Another thing, I am not a warrior and I could never 'commend them' or 'be happy' for there pleasure, at our expense.

Re: sorry but...

Carmen H on 9/12/01 at 18:57 (060031)

I'm sorry but your words are offensive and.....in my very own opinion and speaking soley for myself don't belong on this board. I don't commend anyone on killing another living being and you are wrong by saying you are an American....NO American would commend the killing of innocent human beings (scientific BS or not). If I were you and I didn't want to reveal my identity I would think again about the validity of your word on a board filled with compassion for all types of people in all kinds of situations.
I typically try to be nice to every person that posts here but you leave no room for that.

Re: Anon, it's short for coward !!!

BrianG on 9/12/01 at 21:52 (060056)

'Commend, warriors, brilliant, amazing'? No wonder you hid behind the 'anon' post. You are as bad as they are. A lot of people are comparing yesterday to Pearl Harbor. Now, I guess I would commend the Japanese as warriors. They flew their flag into the heat of the attack. They did not hide, like the terrorists, or the original poster.

Long live the stars and stripes
BCG

PS Anon, what type of warrior do you claim to be?

Re: Anon, it's short for coward !!!

john h on 9/12/01 at 22:20 (060062)

i would not respond to anon's post. it does not need a response.

Re: .

BG CPed on 9/12/01 at 22:52 (060070)

You feel proud for the animals that rode those plans to heaven? You claim you like them are 'warriors' and you can relate to their joy before they hit the building?

A true warrior has a moral compass. A true warrior does not get joy from murdering innocent people. Warriors have a code of ethics and honor. I think the attributes you are trying to glorify are more akin to a sociopaths mindset.

I guess in your mind Charles Manson is also a warrior since he got off on slaughtering people that in his weak mind had what he wanted and were the responsible for him not attaining it.

Re: .

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/12/01 at 23:07 (060073)

Well stated BG. It is incredible that people who profess to be of a religious faith can so severely distort their religious tenets to rationalize such heinous actions.
Ed

Re: .

anon on 9/12/01 at 23:14 (060074)

By calling them 'animals' Brian is attempting to de-humanize them and is laying the foundation for concentration camps. He believes his point of view is morally superior to millions of Muslims. His religion is just as frightening as theirs. Charles Manson is not considered a hero by so many law-abiding citizens of various countries. There are many Arabic newspapers that do not refer to Sadam Hussien or these new heros as evil in any way. By insisting you are on the one and only true side of righteousness is just as bad as their own claims to being on God's side.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/12/01 at 23:28 (060079)

If we are any different, why do we give medals to killers and call them heros? If you honor our veterans, then you commend killing. In their minds anyone supporting our system is not innocent. How many Iraqi children have we, our government, and our heroes killed? We don't know because we don't care. We celebrated victory in Iraq just as many are celebrating this week. To say we are any better is absurd. We, like they, seek only a better life for ourselves and our children. No more, no less, no different.

Re: sorry but...

wendyn on 9/12/01 at 23:54 (060081)

That's funny - I'm Canadian, but I sure don't remember any joyful dancing in the streets during the Gulf war. Maybe I missed it.

There is a difference between defending something that is yours, and attacking someone or something unprovoked. What happened yesterday was not a retaliation for anything - it was a direct attack on thousands of innocent people - designed to cause fear and chaos.

When you understand the difference between the two - then you will begin to understand what it means to fight for something like your freedom, compared to fighting for the sake of fighting. Defense - is honourable. Shooting someone in the back - is not.

It is also honourable to take a stand and state your opinion - whether others agree with it or not.

That - I can do.

That Anon- you apparently cannot.

At least I am proud of where I stand - proud enough to leave my name.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/13/01 at 06:44 (060089)

I, like the terrorists, am in a minority position, which is why I'm anon. That our president called them cowards is an expression of his frustration that he cannot attack them, and so is your attack on me for being anon. It is easy to be proud when you are part of the herd. Like I said before, from their point of view the victims were not innocent. You say you are proud and honorable, but for what cause are you willing to hijack a plane of your enemy and knowingly die in the effort? What post have you made that disagrees with the herd?

Re: sorry but...

Julie on 9/13/01 at 07:02 (060091)

Anon, I suggested once, in response to a post by another 'Anon' , that everyone who posts on this website should identify themselves by name, so that we would all know who we were talking to. I was taken to task for that by Scott, but I am now sure I was right. You are as entitled to your opinion and there is no need to hide. Neither is there any call for you to insult people here by referring to them as a 'herd', which we are not.

But that is really beside the point.

Some of the statements in your original post were deeply offensive to everyone who holds life valuable. But others showed a commendable degree of detachment, and could have been thought-provoking. I regretted the offensive ones because they prevented the others from being listened to.

Re: .

BG CPed on 9/13/01 at 07:12 (060092)

Thanks for using my proper name 'anon'. I didnt say my opinion was superior to millions of Muslims you did. That said if you think that act was supported by millions of Muslims then you a,know millions of Muslims b,you must assume there are millions that are animals. How you draw the conclusion I am paving way for concentration camps is an extreme twist of convoluted thinking.
Supporters of this ARE animals. This was not declared war it was a spinless act. They are not trying to convert us to Muslim. It is a slimey attack at what they believe to be the Great Satan. This is because many of them are oppressed and live in miserable conditions. They like many followerers of Hitler are mush minds that can be fired up to commit these acts under the promise of going to Heaven.

Your reference to my religeon or lack of and saying it is also frightening, wow did you call miss Cleo's Physic hotline to determine what religeon if any I am and what my religeon has done that is similar to this?

As far as true righteousness, yes anybody that would pull an act like that on innocent folks is on the wrong side of righteousness. ESPECIALLY since it was in the name of God and Religeon. So in your mind Hitler was ok cause he believed strongly and had lot of folks behind him?

The fact you have refered to them a few times as 'heros' is either an indication you like to rile up folks to see reaction or you have an extreme case of logic deficient brain syndrome.

So if he is a hero why does he not get on CNN and admit it? Big tough guy and he has millions AND Allah on his side then be proud and be a hero as you say and admit it. Instead he is undergound. In the world community he as gone 'anon' cause he is not strong enough to stand open for his belief,
He attacked many other countries and his supporters have gassed their own people. There were many foriegn nationals and companies in those buildings.

So when we deal with this and show Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan and any orthers involved will you call us heros? Have a nice day and get ready to see how YOUR heros will reap the benefits of their heroic actions.

Re: .

BG CPed on 9/13/01 at 07:29 (060093)

BTW Scott please keep this thread open it is a healthy debate

Re: sorry but...

wendyn on 9/13/01 at 08:02 (060107)

Makes no sense to me. You believe so little in your own opinons that you're afraid to attach your name to them in a BB. We're not talking about getting up on a soapbox in a crowd of angry people where you're life would be at risk.

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/13/01 at 09:12 (060112)

Anon: who invaded Kuwait and pillaged and raped its people?

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/13/01 at 09:45 (060118)

Anon: what is the purpose in the terriorst minds of their actions and ultimately what do they think will come of this action? What do you think their goal is and did they achieve it? Will the responsible people step up and say we did it and here is why? If they will not do this then why? To 'what ultimate end' is their purpose? Is the Arab world a better place today than it was last week. Are it's peoples more happy,better fed, have more hospital care, and have a better future to look forward to.

Re: sorry but../with us or against us?.

Donna M on 9/13/01 at 12:36 (060134)

I have sent this thread to people and have read parts of it to a couple of others. The first response I get back is, 'It sounds like this person is not one of us.'
I tend to agree. With anon's, apparent, vast knowledge of the Arab Nation, seems he/she may live in our country, reap our benefits, but claim alleigence with our enemies.
I maybe be totally wrong, but I have read and re-read and that is what I see.

Re: sorry but...

Judys on 9/13/01 at 13:53 (060149)

Anon, I have never killed an Iraqi child. My government and my military do not deliberately point guns at Iraqi children and kill them. If, however, an Iraqi child is suffering because of US sanctions, it is because that child's leaders are maniacs. I do not know those numbers, but that doesn't mean I don't care. Those poor victims are the innocent pawns of their own governments - not innocent victims of deliberate US bullets. Running airplanes in to tall buildings is not an act of defense. The lives of those children are no better as a result of this act.
I do not honor our veterans because I support killing, I honor them because they defend me, my family and my countrymen at the risk of their own lives.
We celebrate victory re: Iraq because Iraq's leaders commit atrocities on their neighbors with little or no provocation. Ask those neighbors how they feel about US intervention. It is not absurd to say we are better.......because we are better. We are not visiting weapons of mass destruction upon our neighbors - we respect their rights to live life as they choose, and we are not ruthlessly placing our own citizens in harm's way.
You are absolutely right in your one dominant premise - that is that even our enemies, whatever their methods, have a right to their beliefs. Those pilots did in fact believe that they were warriors fighting for their cause. But I'm not sure I would have used the word 'commend' with regard to their actions.
And I'm not sure I would go so far as to put 'Anon' in the enemy camp. He has as much right to post his opinion as any of us without that kind of labeling. He did, after all, lay claim to his Americanism right from the start and expressed his own horror over this act. And it was, after all, a brilliant and amazing attack in it's very simplicity. He did not defend this horrible act, he defended an enemy's right to his or her belief. Like others here, he voiced support of swift and sure retribution and asked that it not be born of a 'knee-jerk' reaction based solely on emotionalism.

Re: .

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 14:11 (060152)

If you are unwilling to admit that people regularly act like animals and give themselves over to evil, you are delusional. Civilization is based upon the fact that there is moral right and moral wrongs. Once you say that there is no objective standard of right and wrong, you are caught in the shifting sands of moral relativism, where no one can make any kind of claim about the dignity or human beings or how they can conduct themselves. B.

Re: sorry but...

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 14:12 (060153)

You are not grasping the difference between 'killing' and 'murder.' There is a profound moral difference. B.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/13/01 at 16:34 (060172)

Barb, the 500,000 Iraqi children we've killed since the end of the war, was that murder or killing?

Re: .

john h on 9/13/01 at 16:41 (060177)

Barb: short but dead on target concerning the shifting sands of moral relativism.

Re: just a minute...

Nancy N on 9/13/01 at 18:56 (060204)

I'm finding it very disturbing that this thread is starting to degenerate into 'us' vs. 'them.' That sort of thinking is the same kind that caused Japanese-Americans to be interned after Pearl Harbor. It is especially disheartening to find it on a board such as this one. We must be very careful not to give in to s sort of thinking, or we may repeat a part of our history that we very much regret.

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/13/01 at 19:07 (060207)

anon: i have lots of medals including a purple heart. i was a rescue pilot and saved lives but my buddies who shot back and died were heroes of the first order. Their country sent them to fight and they did no question asked. Duty,honor,god, country, and family. You bet your ass they were heroes anon. Every time i visit that wall i am reminded of it. You are a disgrace to their memories and those of their families. I do not know who you are but i will say this i detest you.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/13/01 at 19:31 (060213)

The US did not kill 500,000 Iraqi children. Where the heck do you get your news? Perhaps you are referring to the economic embargo we have against Iraq and the hardship it has caused Iraqi citizens? Iraq started the Gulf War and must take full responsibility for its consequences. Iraq spends its wealth, its oil money on weapons instead of feeding its citizens. If anyone has died of malnutrition in Iraq, it is solely because of the actions of the Iraqi government (your buddy Sadam), not the citizens of the United States.
Ed

Re: sorry but...

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 21:19 (060233)

Your facts in the case seem as anonymous as you are. B.

Re: just a minute...

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 21:36 (060237)

Nancy - we can take from your example some great hope of somehow breaching this situation. The Japaneese in America are a vital part of our culture today... can't even think of any crimes/slurs/hate groups that target them. This amicability was possible in only 60 years. That is barely a second in the time span of cultures. B.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/13/01 at 22:35 (060253)

For those wanting a reference for the claim that 500,000 Iraqi children have been murdered by us:

http://home.att.net/~drew.hamre/

Barb, is murder the correct term here? You claimed to have a superior knowledge of morality, so I'll let you be the judge.

Re: just a minute.../ to Nancy N

Donna M on 9/13/01 at 22:49 (060257)

What I quoted my friend said, 'is' how I feel. If a person, of any race or nationality, can commend or be happy for the actions of terrorists, that have just killed thousands of our fellow countrymen, then they are 'not' one of 'us' and I darn sure don't want to be one of 'them'.
I'm sorry if you are upset by what I said. Except for some detailed facts by a few like John, Dr. Ed, etc, almost every post on here is a person's opinion. This is mine.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/13/01 at 23:17 (060260)

Anon--is that your real name or is it anonymous?
I read the web site that you provided. The claim is that the embargo against Iraq lead to the deaths of Iraqi children. I understand what you are claiming. I can understand the arguments against the embargo, particularly that the embargo may hurt the people of Iraq more than the government which is the real target.

Anon, you have a real problem with the concept of cause and effect. Why is there an embargo? Because Iraq invaded Kuwait and because Iraq supports terrorism. Iraq has attacked the Kurds in the north of Iraq, slaughtering innocent people every chance it could get. Iraq caused the embargo to happen. Furthermore, Iraq has spent a lot of money since the war in 1991 rebuilding it's war machine. Why is Iraq not spending that money to feed the children? Iraq looked at hte choice of guns vs. butter and has chosen guns!
Ed

Re: just a minute.../ to Nancy N

Nancy N on 9/14/01 at 05:50 (060272)

Donna--

You are as entitled to your opinion as everyone else on the board is, and I did not mean to say that you are not. I know that my own opinion is in the minority here in many regards. But I do feel very strongly that as soon as we move toward an 'us' vs. 'them' mentality, we allow ourselves to dehumanize others and not see them as potentially innocent individuals, but rather as guilty by race (essentially, guilty by the circumstances of their birth).

Having committed our own atrocity of war with our Japanese citizenry in WWII, I find it especially disturbing that our society may be so blinded by its anger that we may do something similar now. That regrettable incident should serve as a cautionary tale to us now. Are internment camps for Arab-Americans coming? I fear so, knowing that many of them are already being attacked or shunned by their communities. It is justified to intern a law-abiding Arab-American citizen simply because of his or her race? I don't think so. I had hoped we had learned from that mistake.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/14/01 at 06:28 (060278)

Ed,
Iraqi children nor their parents voted him into power. We specifically allowed him to remain in power in false hopes of successful rebellion. We could have instituted democracy, but we chose to hope that another dictator would take control. When that failed, we murdered 300,000 more children under age 5 with sanctions. The people in NY were directly responsible for Palestinians continuing to be forcefully exiled from Palestine. I mention Iraq as one of many examples where we have done worse than the NY attack, the only difference is that we are better at obscuring our action and self-denial. Bin Laden's primary ties are to Palestine, so I don't know if he has strong ties to Iraq. Your suggestion is like saying Bill Gates should be the one to pay money to the families in NY.

I'm not really against all the murders we've committed (I assume Barb is still OK with that term), I just don't want the religious zealots here to think we are morally better. It's just a matter of war, business as usual, and oil to me, and to everyone else here that isn't in denial.

Re: sorry but...

Barbara TX on 9/14/01 at 10:00 (060295)

If moral superiority is claiming that there is a nautral law written on the hearts of men that allows them to distinguish evil from good, count me in. What would you be if you starved your child for a 'religious' principle? You assume that everyone acts appropriately in every situation. This is called moral relativism. First, it clear that every person acts to attain a perceived good, that is, human beings always act in 'accordance with the good.' However, many things interfere with their actually choosing the best goods in proper heirarchy. For example, they would ignore a sick or starving child, or not give it medical care to pursue some other end. A murderer is a person that ranks the 'good' of a religious or political ideology above the needs of his starving countrymen.

You also make the funny assumption that the political leaders of other countries love their countrymen. They don't. Remember Oklahoma City? B.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/14/01 at 10:50 (060304)

Anon:

'Murder' is the deliberate taking of one's life. The US has not deliberately taken the lives of Iraqi children. Iraqi children may have died of malnutrition as a consequence of the embargo. The government of Iraq has made a concious decision to allow the starvation--where are the billlions of dollars of oil money being used? We probably made an error in the Gulf War in not 'finishing the job' by going all the way to Baghdad and eliminating Sadam but we did so to appease our 'allies' in the Middle East.

Bill Gates, amy indeed, contribute money to the victims in New York.

How are the people in NY 'directly responsible' for the Palestinians being 'forcibly exiled' from Palestine? Keep in mind that, in terms of territory, the majority of the land of the British Mandate of Palestine, that is, all of the mandate east of the Jordan River was given to the Hashemite Arabs (King Hussein) but the population of Jordan has a majority of Palestinians. Also, in 1948, the remainder of the mandate, the portion west of the Jordan River was partitioned between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It was the Arab neighbors, Egypt and Syria that refused to accept the partition, waged war and created the refugee problem.
Ed

Re: just a minute.../ to Nancy N

Donna M on 9/14/01 at 11:27 (060312)

Nancy,
I agree with you on several of your points. Let me first say that I think Our Country and our people would NEVER allow there to EVER be such things as the type 'camps' like there were. Our people are to much into equality, human rights, and basically are too 'soft' for that now. When our judicial system gives life for grand theft and 10 years for a persons life? No, we are far from camps, I think, Americans would not stand for it.
Just look at the majority on here that are not for retaliation, and there are just a minute number of people on this board period. I think most on here are unsure how they feel, like I am.
As far as the Arab-Americans being shunned, it is out of fear, which is understandable. Just look how the terrorists, that did this, had fit right into our lifestyle and were like any other American. Look what happened.
I, for one, am very leary at this point. I know there are good people of all races and nationalities, but as for the situation we are in right now, I think it will pay us to be skeptical and suspicious, in order to keep our fellow Americans alive.
To let you know also, even if I have a different opinion than someone else, like some of the others have said, who's to say who is right or wrong? There have been a few things posted that I highly disagree with (not from you or other regular PFers) but that is neither here nor there. Difference in people and opinions is what makes all of us unique. Fact being all we can do is pray and hope our leaders do what God leads them to do.

GOD BLESS AMERICA

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/14/01 at 12:05 (060320)

The NY people supported the U.S. providing arms to Israel, but not to Palestinians. We haven't been neutral in that war to keep Palestinians out of Palestine. The NY people did not throw them out, but we have helped keep them in exile. As early as 1920, the palestinians were objecting to the importation of Jews. They knew it would eventually displace them. Thank you Dr. Davis for providing historical information. I am finished. I am sure I will be in full support of our idiotic leader. My complaint is about religious patriotism and believing we have an absolutely correct God on our side. This makes us too much like them. I prefer our actions to be strictly business. Cold and professional.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/14/01 at 15:43 (060347)

Anon:

I do not think we can resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict here. Suffice it to say that the violence must stop at some point. I think that most rational people can see that. At times, certain power hungry national leaders have used the conflict as a tool to maintain power. Unfortunately, the citizens of their countries, innocent children have been pawns in the conflict. The Middle East is a large place. There is enough room for everyone to live in peace without being displaced. There has been enough money made on oil to buy every citizen of the Middle East a very comfortable house, food, comfort and security.
Ed

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/14/01 at 15:56 (060350)

Amen to that Ed!

Re: sorry but...

Nancy N on 9/14/01 at 17:28 (060367)

Barb--

I know you are our resident philosopher, and I for one woul love to hear more on this topic. In reading this post of yours, I suspect that we may actually be closer in our view than we might previously have guessed, but the language got in the way of us seeing it.

I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement, that 'A murderer is a person that ranks the 'good' of a religious or political ideology above the needs of his starving countrymen.' It sums up what I've been trying to say on another thread--that people act in accordance with what they feel is right, but that their perception of 'right' can be altered by things like their religious upbringing, views they were taught as a child, etc. Therefore, they think they are doing the 'right' thing even though they may not be.

Wow. That really is all I have been trying to say, and evidently saying it very poorly. Thanks for your post.

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/14/01 at 19:01 (060379)

From my reading of Nancy N and Barb's post i see you at opposite ends of the world. I will be interested to see how you to come together on this.

Re: sorry but...

Nancy N on 9/14/01 at 19:47 (060388)

Like I said, it's possible that we are expressing the same idea in different ways. All I know is that when I read Barb's post, I recognized the exact idea I was talking about. I take the blame for any confusion, but maintain that we are (unless I am misreading Barb) saying the same thing, just approaching it in different ways.

Re: .

Donna M on 9/12/01 at 18:47 (060028)

Some of what you say is....well another story.
The thing I see where you are really 'off base' is your last paragraph.
Our people, your friends and family, along with mine and everybody else's in this great country, including the innocent ones in yesterday's disaster, WE ARE AMERICA!!!! Our part of the country may be classified as America, but we, the citizens, are what make it the greatest country in the world. It's not the land, oceans, rivers, skyscrapers, etc. It is 'WE THE PEOPLE'.
Another thing, I am not a warrior and I could never 'commend them' or 'be happy' for there pleasure, at our expense.

Re: sorry but...

Carmen H on 9/12/01 at 18:57 (060031)

I'm sorry but your words are offensive and.....in my very own opinion and speaking soley for myself don't belong on this board. I don't commend anyone on killing another living being and you are wrong by saying you are an American....NO American would commend the killing of innocent human beings (scientific BS or not). If I were you and I didn't want to reveal my identity I would think again about the validity of your word on a board filled with compassion for all types of people in all kinds of situations.
I typically try to be nice to every person that posts here but you leave no room for that.

Re: Anon, it's short for coward !!!

BrianG on 9/12/01 at 21:52 (060056)

'Commend, warriors, brilliant, amazing'? No wonder you hid behind the 'anon' post. You are as bad as they are. A lot of people are comparing yesterday to Pearl Harbor. Now, I guess I would commend the Japanese as warriors. They flew their flag into the heat of the attack. They did not hide, like the terrorists, or the original poster.

Long live the stars and stripes
BCG

PS Anon, what type of warrior do you claim to be?

Re: Anon, it's short for coward !!!

john h on 9/12/01 at 22:20 (060062)

i would not respond to anon's post. it does not need a response.

Re: .

BG CPed on 9/12/01 at 22:52 (060070)

You feel proud for the animals that rode those plans to heaven? You claim you like them are 'warriors' and you can relate to their joy before they hit the building?

A true warrior has a moral compass. A true warrior does not get joy from murdering innocent people. Warriors have a code of ethics and honor. I think the attributes you are trying to glorify are more akin to a sociopaths mindset.

I guess in your mind Charles Manson is also a warrior since he got off on slaughtering people that in his weak mind had what he wanted and were the responsible for him not attaining it.

Re: .

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/12/01 at 23:07 (060073)

Well stated BG. It is incredible that people who profess to be of a religious faith can so severely distort their religious tenets to rationalize such heinous actions.
Ed

Re: .

anon on 9/12/01 at 23:14 (060074)

By calling them 'animals' Brian is attempting to de-humanize them and is laying the foundation for concentration camps. He believes his point of view is morally superior to millions of Muslims. His religion is just as frightening as theirs. Charles Manson is not considered a hero by so many law-abiding citizens of various countries. There are many Arabic newspapers that do not refer to Sadam Hussien or these new heros as evil in any way. By insisting you are on the one and only true side of righteousness is just as bad as their own claims to being on God's side.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/12/01 at 23:28 (060079)

If we are any different, why do we give medals to killers and call them heros? If you honor our veterans, then you commend killing. In their minds anyone supporting our system is not innocent. How many Iraqi children have we, our government, and our heroes killed? We don't know because we don't care. We celebrated victory in Iraq just as many are celebrating this week. To say we are any better is absurd. We, like they, seek only a better life for ourselves and our children. No more, no less, no different.

Re: sorry but...

wendyn on 9/12/01 at 23:54 (060081)

That's funny - I'm Canadian, but I sure don't remember any joyful dancing in the streets during the Gulf war. Maybe I missed it.

There is a difference between defending something that is yours, and attacking someone or something unprovoked. What happened yesterday was not a retaliation for anything - it was a direct attack on thousands of innocent people - designed to cause fear and chaos.

When you understand the difference between the two - then you will begin to understand what it means to fight for something like your freedom, compared to fighting for the sake of fighting. Defense - is honourable. Shooting someone in the back - is not.

It is also honourable to take a stand and state your opinion - whether others agree with it or not.

That - I can do.

That Anon- you apparently cannot.

At least I am proud of where I stand - proud enough to leave my name.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/13/01 at 06:44 (060089)

I, like the terrorists, am in a minority position, which is why I'm anon. That our president called them cowards is an expression of his frustration that he cannot attack them, and so is your attack on me for being anon. It is easy to be proud when you are part of the herd. Like I said before, from their point of view the victims were not innocent. You say you are proud and honorable, but for what cause are you willing to hijack a plane of your enemy and knowingly die in the effort? What post have you made that disagrees with the herd?

Re: sorry but...

Julie on 9/13/01 at 07:02 (060091)

Anon, I suggested once, in response to a post by another 'Anon' , that everyone who posts on this website should identify themselves by name, so that we would all know who we were talking to. I was taken to task for that by Scott, but I am now sure I was right. You are as entitled to your opinion and there is no need to hide. Neither is there any call for you to insult people here by referring to them as a 'herd', which we are not.

But that is really beside the point.

Some of the statements in your original post were deeply offensive to everyone who holds life valuable. But others showed a commendable degree of detachment, and could have been thought-provoking. I regretted the offensive ones because they prevented the others from being listened to.

Re: .

BG CPed on 9/13/01 at 07:12 (060092)

Thanks for using my proper name 'anon'. I didnt say my opinion was superior to millions of Muslims you did. That said if you think that act was supported by millions of Muslims then you a,know millions of Muslims b,you must assume there are millions that are animals. How you draw the conclusion I am paving way for concentration camps is an extreme twist of convoluted thinking.
Supporters of this ARE animals. This was not declared war it was a spinless act. They are not trying to convert us to Muslim. It is a slimey attack at what they believe to be the Great Satan. This is because many of them are oppressed and live in miserable conditions. They like many followerers of Hitler are mush minds that can be fired up to commit these acts under the promise of going to Heaven.

Your reference to my religeon or lack of and saying it is also frightening, wow did you call miss Cleo's Physic hotline to determine what religeon if any I am and what my religeon has done that is similar to this?

As far as true righteousness, yes anybody that would pull an act like that on innocent folks is on the wrong side of righteousness. ESPECIALLY since it was in the name of God and Religeon. So in your mind Hitler was ok cause he believed strongly and had lot of folks behind him?

The fact you have refered to them a few times as 'heros' is either an indication you like to rile up folks to see reaction or you have an extreme case of logic deficient brain syndrome.

So if he is a hero why does he not get on CNN and admit it? Big tough guy and he has millions AND Allah on his side then be proud and be a hero as you say and admit it. Instead he is undergound. In the world community he as gone 'anon' cause he is not strong enough to stand open for his belief,
He attacked many other countries and his supporters have gassed their own people. There were many foriegn nationals and companies in those buildings.

So when we deal with this and show Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan and any orthers involved will you call us heros? Have a nice day and get ready to see how YOUR heros will reap the benefits of their heroic actions.

Re: .

BG CPed on 9/13/01 at 07:29 (060093)

BTW Scott please keep this thread open it is a healthy debate

Re: sorry but...

wendyn on 9/13/01 at 08:02 (060107)

Makes no sense to me. You believe so little in your own opinons that you're afraid to attach your name to them in a BB. We're not talking about getting up on a soapbox in a crowd of angry people where you're life would be at risk.

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/13/01 at 09:12 (060112)

Anon: who invaded Kuwait and pillaged and raped its people?

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/13/01 at 09:45 (060118)

Anon: what is the purpose in the terriorst minds of their actions and ultimately what do they think will come of this action? What do you think their goal is and did they achieve it? Will the responsible people step up and say we did it and here is why? If they will not do this then why? To 'what ultimate end' is their purpose? Is the Arab world a better place today than it was last week. Are it's peoples more happy,better fed, have more hospital care, and have a better future to look forward to.

Re: sorry but../with us or against us?.

Donna M on 9/13/01 at 12:36 (060134)

I have sent this thread to people and have read parts of it to a couple of others. The first response I get back is, 'It sounds like this person is not one of us.'
I tend to agree. With anon's, apparent, vast knowledge of the Arab Nation, seems he/she may live in our country, reap our benefits, but claim alleigence with our enemies.
I maybe be totally wrong, but I have read and re-read and that is what I see.

Re: sorry but...

Judys on 9/13/01 at 13:53 (060149)

Anon, I have never killed an Iraqi child. My government and my military do not deliberately point guns at Iraqi children and kill them. If, however, an Iraqi child is suffering because of US sanctions, it is because that child's leaders are maniacs. I do not know those numbers, but that doesn't mean I don't care. Those poor victims are the innocent pawns of their own governments - not innocent victims of deliberate US bullets. Running airplanes in to tall buildings is not an act of defense. The lives of those children are no better as a result of this act.
I do not honor our veterans because I support killing, I honor them because they defend me, my family and my countrymen at the risk of their own lives.
We celebrate victory re: Iraq because Iraq's leaders commit atrocities on their neighbors with little or no provocation. Ask those neighbors how they feel about US intervention. It is not absurd to say we are better.......because we are better. We are not visiting weapons of mass destruction upon our neighbors - we respect their rights to live life as they choose, and we are not ruthlessly placing our own citizens in harm's way.
You are absolutely right in your one dominant premise - that is that even our enemies, whatever their methods, have a right to their beliefs. Those pilots did in fact believe that they were warriors fighting for their cause. But I'm not sure I would have used the word 'commend' with regard to their actions.
And I'm not sure I would go so far as to put 'Anon' in the enemy camp. He has as much right to post his opinion as any of us without that kind of labeling. He did, after all, lay claim to his Americanism right from the start and expressed his own horror over this act. And it was, after all, a brilliant and amazing attack in it's very simplicity. He did not defend this horrible act, he defended an enemy's right to his or her belief. Like others here, he voiced support of swift and sure retribution and asked that it not be born of a 'knee-jerk' reaction based solely on emotionalism.

Re: .

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 14:11 (060152)

If you are unwilling to admit that people regularly act like animals and give themselves over to evil, you are delusional. Civilization is based upon the fact that there is moral right and moral wrongs. Once you say that there is no objective standard of right and wrong, you are caught in the shifting sands of moral relativism, where no one can make any kind of claim about the dignity or human beings or how they can conduct themselves. B.

Re: sorry but...

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 14:12 (060153)

You are not grasping the difference between 'killing' and 'murder.' There is a profound moral difference. B.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/13/01 at 16:34 (060172)

Barb, the 500,000 Iraqi children we've killed since the end of the war, was that murder or killing?

Re: .

john h on 9/13/01 at 16:41 (060177)

Barb: short but dead on target concerning the shifting sands of moral relativism.

Re: just a minute...

Nancy N on 9/13/01 at 18:56 (060204)

I'm finding it very disturbing that this thread is starting to degenerate into 'us' vs. 'them.' That sort of thinking is the same kind that caused Japanese-Americans to be interned after Pearl Harbor. It is especially disheartening to find it on a board such as this one. We must be very careful not to give in to s sort of thinking, or we may repeat a part of our history that we very much regret.

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/13/01 at 19:07 (060207)

anon: i have lots of medals including a purple heart. i was a rescue pilot and saved lives but my buddies who shot back and died were heroes of the first order. Their country sent them to fight and they did no question asked. Duty,honor,god, country, and family. You bet your ass they were heroes anon. Every time i visit that wall i am reminded of it. You are a disgrace to their memories and those of their families. I do not know who you are but i will say this i detest you.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/13/01 at 19:31 (060213)

The US did not kill 500,000 Iraqi children. Where the heck do you get your news? Perhaps you are referring to the economic embargo we have against Iraq and the hardship it has caused Iraqi citizens? Iraq started the Gulf War and must take full responsibility for its consequences. Iraq spends its wealth, its oil money on weapons instead of feeding its citizens. If anyone has died of malnutrition in Iraq, it is solely because of the actions of the Iraqi government (your buddy Sadam), not the citizens of the United States.
Ed

Re: sorry but...

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 21:19 (060233)

Your facts in the case seem as anonymous as you are. B.

Re: just a minute...

Barbara TX on 9/13/01 at 21:36 (060237)

Nancy - we can take from your example some great hope of somehow breaching this situation. The Japaneese in America are a vital part of our culture today... can't even think of any crimes/slurs/hate groups that target them. This amicability was possible in only 60 years. That is barely a second in the time span of cultures. B.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/13/01 at 22:35 (060253)

For those wanting a reference for the claim that 500,000 Iraqi children have been murdered by us:

http://home.att.net/~drew.hamre/

Barb, is murder the correct term here? You claimed to have a superior knowledge of morality, so I'll let you be the judge.

Re: just a minute.../ to Nancy N

Donna M on 9/13/01 at 22:49 (060257)

What I quoted my friend said, 'is' how I feel. If a person, of any race or nationality, can commend or be happy for the actions of terrorists, that have just killed thousands of our fellow countrymen, then they are 'not' one of 'us' and I darn sure don't want to be one of 'them'.
I'm sorry if you are upset by what I said. Except for some detailed facts by a few like John, Dr. Ed, etc, almost every post on here is a person's opinion. This is mine.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/13/01 at 23:17 (060260)

Anon--is that your real name or is it anonymous?
I read the web site that you provided. The claim is that the embargo against Iraq lead to the deaths of Iraqi children. I understand what you are claiming. I can understand the arguments against the embargo, particularly that the embargo may hurt the people of Iraq more than the government which is the real target.

Anon, you have a real problem with the concept of cause and effect. Why is there an embargo? Because Iraq invaded Kuwait and because Iraq supports terrorism. Iraq has attacked the Kurds in the north of Iraq, slaughtering innocent people every chance it could get. Iraq caused the embargo to happen. Furthermore, Iraq has spent a lot of money since the war in 1991 rebuilding it's war machine. Why is Iraq not spending that money to feed the children? Iraq looked at hte choice of guns vs. butter and has chosen guns!
Ed

Re: just a minute.../ to Nancy N

Nancy N on 9/14/01 at 05:50 (060272)

Donna--

You are as entitled to your opinion as everyone else on the board is, and I did not mean to say that you are not. I know that my own opinion is in the minority here in many regards. But I do feel very strongly that as soon as we move toward an 'us' vs. 'them' mentality, we allow ourselves to dehumanize others and not see them as potentially innocent individuals, but rather as guilty by race (essentially, guilty by the circumstances of their birth).

Having committed our own atrocity of war with our Japanese citizenry in WWII, I find it especially disturbing that our society may be so blinded by its anger that we may do something similar now. That regrettable incident should serve as a cautionary tale to us now. Are internment camps for Arab-Americans coming? I fear so, knowing that many of them are already being attacked or shunned by their communities. It is justified to intern a law-abiding Arab-American citizen simply because of his or her race? I don't think so. I had hoped we had learned from that mistake.

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/14/01 at 06:28 (060278)

Ed,
Iraqi children nor their parents voted him into power. We specifically allowed him to remain in power in false hopes of successful rebellion. We could have instituted democracy, but we chose to hope that another dictator would take control. When that failed, we murdered 300,000 more children under age 5 with sanctions. The people in NY were directly responsible for Palestinians continuing to be forcefully exiled from Palestine. I mention Iraq as one of many examples where we have done worse than the NY attack, the only difference is that we are better at obscuring our action and self-denial. Bin Laden's primary ties are to Palestine, so I don't know if he has strong ties to Iraq. Your suggestion is like saying Bill Gates should be the one to pay money to the families in NY.

I'm not really against all the murders we've committed (I assume Barb is still OK with that term), I just don't want the religious zealots here to think we are morally better. It's just a matter of war, business as usual, and oil to me, and to everyone else here that isn't in denial.

Re: sorry but...

Barbara TX on 9/14/01 at 10:00 (060295)

If moral superiority is claiming that there is a nautral law written on the hearts of men that allows them to distinguish evil from good, count me in. What would you be if you starved your child for a 'religious' principle? You assume that everyone acts appropriately in every situation. This is called moral relativism. First, it clear that every person acts to attain a perceived good, that is, human beings always act in 'accordance with the good.' However, many things interfere with their actually choosing the best goods in proper heirarchy. For example, they would ignore a sick or starving child, or not give it medical care to pursue some other end. A murderer is a person that ranks the 'good' of a religious or political ideology above the needs of his starving countrymen.

You also make the funny assumption that the political leaders of other countries love their countrymen. They don't. Remember Oklahoma City? B.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/14/01 at 10:50 (060304)

Anon:

'Murder' is the deliberate taking of one's life. The US has not deliberately taken the lives of Iraqi children. Iraqi children may have died of malnutrition as a consequence of the embargo. The government of Iraq has made a concious decision to allow the starvation--where are the billlions of dollars of oil money being used? We probably made an error in the Gulf War in not 'finishing the job' by going all the way to Baghdad and eliminating Sadam but we did so to appease our 'allies' in the Middle East.

Bill Gates, amy indeed, contribute money to the victims in New York.

How are the people in NY 'directly responsible' for the Palestinians being 'forcibly exiled' from Palestine? Keep in mind that, in terms of territory, the majority of the land of the British Mandate of Palestine, that is, all of the mandate east of the Jordan River was given to the Hashemite Arabs (King Hussein) but the population of Jordan has a majority of Palestinians. Also, in 1948, the remainder of the mandate, the portion west of the Jordan River was partitioned between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It was the Arab neighbors, Egypt and Syria that refused to accept the partition, waged war and created the refugee problem.
Ed

Re: just a minute.../ to Nancy N

Donna M on 9/14/01 at 11:27 (060312)

Nancy,
I agree with you on several of your points. Let me first say that I think Our Country and our people would NEVER allow there to EVER be such things as the type 'camps' like there were. Our people are to much into equality, human rights, and basically are too 'soft' for that now. When our judicial system gives life for grand theft and 10 years for a persons life? No, we are far from camps, I think, Americans would not stand for it.
Just look at the majority on here that are not for retaliation, and there are just a minute number of people on this board period. I think most on here are unsure how they feel, like I am.
As far as the Arab-Americans being shunned, it is out of fear, which is understandable. Just look how the terrorists, that did this, had fit right into our lifestyle and were like any other American. Look what happened.
I, for one, am very leary at this point. I know there are good people of all races and nationalities, but as for the situation we are in right now, I think it will pay us to be skeptical and suspicious, in order to keep our fellow Americans alive.
To let you know also, even if I have a different opinion than someone else, like some of the others have said, who's to say who is right or wrong? There have been a few things posted that I highly disagree with (not from you or other regular PFers) but that is neither here nor there. Difference in people and opinions is what makes all of us unique. Fact being all we can do is pray and hope our leaders do what God leads them to do.

GOD BLESS AMERICA

Re: sorry but...

anon on 9/14/01 at 12:05 (060320)

The NY people supported the U.S. providing arms to Israel, but not to Palestinians. We haven't been neutral in that war to keep Palestinians out of Palestine. The NY people did not throw them out, but we have helped keep them in exile. As early as 1920, the palestinians were objecting to the importation of Jews. They knew it would eventually displace them. Thank you Dr. Davis for providing historical information. I am finished. I am sure I will be in full support of our idiotic leader. My complaint is about religious patriotism and believing we have an absolutely correct God on our side. This makes us too much like them. I prefer our actions to be strictly business. Cold and professional.

Re: sorry but...

Ed Davis, DPM on 9/14/01 at 15:43 (060347)

Anon:

I do not think we can resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict here. Suffice it to say that the violence must stop at some point. I think that most rational people can see that. At times, certain power hungry national leaders have used the conflict as a tool to maintain power. Unfortunately, the citizens of their countries, innocent children have been pawns in the conflict. The Middle East is a large place. There is enough room for everyone to live in peace without being displaced. There has been enough money made on oil to buy every citizen of the Middle East a very comfortable house, food, comfort and security.
Ed

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/14/01 at 15:56 (060350)

Amen to that Ed!

Re: sorry but...

Nancy N on 9/14/01 at 17:28 (060367)

Barb--

I know you are our resident philosopher, and I for one woul love to hear more on this topic. In reading this post of yours, I suspect that we may actually be closer in our view than we might previously have guessed, but the language got in the way of us seeing it.

I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement, that 'A murderer is a person that ranks the 'good' of a religious or political ideology above the needs of his starving countrymen.' It sums up what I've been trying to say on another thread--that people act in accordance with what they feel is right, but that their perception of 'right' can be altered by things like their religious upbringing, views they were taught as a child, etc. Therefore, they think they are doing the 'right' thing even though they may not be.

Wow. That really is all I have been trying to say, and evidently saying it very poorly. Thanks for your post.

Re: sorry but...

john h on 9/14/01 at 19:01 (060379)

From my reading of Nancy N and Barb's post i see you at opposite ends of the world. I will be interested to see how you to come together on this.

Re: sorry but...

Nancy N on 9/14/01 at 19:47 (060388)

Like I said, it's possible that we are expressing the same idea in different ways. All I know is that when I read Barb's post, I recognized the exact idea I was talking about. I take the blame for any confusion, but maintain that we are (unless I am misreading Barb) saying the same thing, just approaching it in different ways.