Justice for the Victims of 9/11 ! :: (a minority viewpoint)

Stories

Diaries

Polls

Users

Web Adequacy.org

Home

About

Topics

Rejects

Abortions

This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.

Poll

Votes: 9

Justice for the Victims of 9/11 ! :: (a minority viewpoint)

Author:

Inden

Topic:

Diaries

Posted:

Oct 16, 2001

Comments:

By our own standards, 9/11 was a crime, not an act of war. We are all agreeing to think of it as an act of war but since it was not committed by a sovereign power against the US, it wasn't an act of war. We were all too stunned and the media too cowed and the politicians (except Barbara Lee) too eager to get on the popular bandwagon, to call it a crime instead of war.

More diaries by Inden

	The End Can't Justify the Means Because There Isn't One
	Osama Bin Falwell
	Do They Hate Americans or Just Our Government?
	Here's Some More Meat for You SFB Vultures! Enjoy!
	American Values & Pax Americana
	I Am Not A Pacifist - Taliban Must Go - We Must Rebuild Afghanistan Afterward
	This is N O T a Test!
	It's not their Economy Stupid!
	This will be Skippy's Last Diary Entry Here
	Confidence Game E-Mail Example
	Number Won !
	Struggle With Violence Is Eternal
	First Commandment: Revisit As Often As Necessary
	Delicate Question for Muslims
	The Reason I'm Posting on Adequacy Despite Being Unwelcome
	Islam vs. non-Islam in a tiny nutshell
	Nobel Prize for Irrelevance: How Wrong I Was !
	Nurturing Healthy Palestinian and Israeli Senses of National Identity
	West Virgina Allegory
	The ZogCore? Answer Man Is Here !
	Christian Sponsorship of Rationlist Islamic Charity as Foreign Policy
	Meine Ehre Heisst Speaking Truth to Power
	Brief Public Service Reminder
	Galactic Hitchiker Travel Advisory
	Writer vs. Editor Relationship in a Nutshell

We are intervening in the ongoing Afghan civil war as if the Taliban government committed the attack. Our excuse is that they deserve it because they wouldn't deliver all the suspects and material witnesses to the crime living within their terrortory (not a mistype) when we demanded it of them. Because of the way we defined it as a war from day one and not a crime, we did not seek to send investigators (even proxy investigators from Pakistan) to interview the suspects and material witnesses. Our case relies on classified secret evidence, the nature [but not all we are told] of which has been outlined by a statement issued by the British Government (why not our own also?).

Our government showed its detailed evidence to our allies in NATO and obtained their 'indictment' as well. Pakistan's ruling General Musharraf was also briefed on the secret material and indicated his agreement that it constituted sufficient proof of Al-Qaida's guilt. I'm not going to speculate on any ulterior motives any of these actors could potentially have that might prejudice their opinion in favor of the US position.

Here in the US we are content to accept the word of our government that they have enough evidence to kill everyone 'associated with the Al-Qaida network' for the crimes of September 11 without presenting any written materials at all. The British report was vetted by Washington but cannot be considered an official US Government statement.

The definition of who is or is not a member of the Al-Qaida network is unresolved. In effect, we have elevated the status of the Al-Qaida to that of a sovereign state so that we may be able to conduct a war against it.

We have defined the enemy we want to fight and are now in the process of fighting that enemy with all the means at the disposal of the free world. Unfortunately, in the process of defining the enemy we want to fight, we have diverged from our own reliance on legitimate legal process and left the definition of the 'enemy' as a blank space to be filled in by the names of whomever our government happens to find wherever it is that they happen to go whenever they say that they have 'got' an international terrorist.

There is probably a more finessed and precise way of pursuing this campaign against 'international terrorism' than hunting foxes and gophers with 5,000 pound bombs. D'ya think?

	Disappointing. (5.00 / 1) (#1)
	by RobotSlave on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 11:41:13 PM PST

	At a paltry 450+, it's probably too short for the queue over at wrangling-orangutangs.org Sweet dreams! © 2002, RobotSlave. You may not reproduce this material, in whole or in part, without written permission of the owner.

	Indeed. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
	by tkatchev on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 05:06:35 AM PST

	Also, it is missing a paragraph of liberalist self-loathing about the "occupation of Palestine" and "genocide of the Palestinian people". The liberalist scum-pit over at gibbering-gobbons.org prides itself on the ability to layer heaps of self-loathing on itself. -- Peace and much love...

	how (none / 0) (#6)
	by alprazolam on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 01:44:27 PM PST

	does being opposed to Israel make you a self loathing liberal? I can think of a lot of non liberals who are opposed to Israel, and most likely jews in general.

	Your question. (5.00 / 1) (#8)
	by Craig McPherson on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 03:02:08 PM PST

	"does being opposed to Israel make you a self loathing liberal?" Yes. All Liberals are anti-Semites, and all anti-Semites are Liberals. If you don't believe that Liberals are evil morons, let me prove it to you. Recently, there was a radio debate between a Conservative or Libertarian woman (I didn't listen to enough of it to figure out exactly where her views lay) and a Liberal man on a local radio station. The debate was about gun control. The woman explained that she lives 30 miles from the nearest police station, and that if anyone ever tried to break into her home and rape her, her handgun would be her only defense. The man's reply: "Nobody would ever want to rape you; you're too old and ugly." This is Liberalism in its purest and most frightening form. This is how Liberals think. This is what Democrats believe. This is what people who oppose Israel are. The next time you see a Liberal, punch him/her in the stomach and say "That's for the hateful, ignorant, anti-woman comments your Communist brother made on the radio." Even better yet, RAPE him/her to teach him/her what it feels like. A little "sensitivity training" might beat the Liberalism right out of him. -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	that sounds familiar (none / 0) (#9)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 04:19:37 PM PST

	"Nobody would ever want to rape you; you're too old and ugly." I wish members of the GOP would stop talking about Hillary that way.

	Absolutely (5.00 / 1) (#3)
	by zikzak on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 07:49:03 AM PST

	As you excellently point out, clearly there must be a better way to combat this threat. When I watch news coverage of anti-war protests I think to myself, "You know, these people are right. Our solution to this problem is not perfect." Further, since we have never dealt with something like this before, I get the impression that the people behind the scenes are just making it up as they go along. Since none of the astute critics have yet to offer any better suggestions, we are left with only one obvious choice. We must end all of our efforts at stopping terrorism immediately and begin searching for a solution that is acceptable to all the various peoples that cover our globe. Our first step should be the formation of multiple congressional committees tasked with exploring alternative means of stopping suicidal people from flying airplanes into buildings. These commiittees could also perform detailed studies on how the US postal service can be revamped in order to prevent the mailing of Anthrax. Privately funded think tanks will also be needed to offer counterpoint to governmental policy (and to other think tanks) so that we do not lose the voice of the people in our debates. Finally, the White House should appoint an Ethics of Preventing Terrorism Czar who will oversee other groups and issue press releases describing how important the role of an Ethics Czar is. We may be under attack, but this is certainly not the time for action. The important thing is to point out all the problems with any military response without suggesting any alternative. In closing, put on your biological warfare suit and drive (don't fly!) to the nation's capital so you too can protest our government's decision to try to protect its citizens. Just because people are trying to kill us (and succeeding) doesn't mean we should behave any differently than we usually do.

	I wholeheartedly agree (none / 0) (#4)
	by hauntedattics on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 09:54:02 AM PST

	The only thing you missed, zikzak, was the government employing a whole group of apologists to gaze into their navels for awhile to come up with reasons why we, the American people, are somehow responsible for the attacks. Oh wait...

	figures. (5.00 / 1) (#12)
	by osm on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 11:58:47 PM PST

	whenever you decide to "get over yourself" and quit being a bleeding heart drop me an email. on the other hand, it looks like you've found someone more to your liking. the poor bastard. peace is for fools.

	I'm hurt... (none / 0) (#17)
	by hauntedattics on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 10:16:21 AM PST

	Bleeding heart? Whadja say that for? Methinks someone has a bit of irony deficiency complicating his misogyny. And as for 'finding someone more to my liking', you're just jealous. It's kinda sweet.

	who are you? (none / 0) (#21)
	by osm on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 03:48:33 PM PST

	how did you find this site? what, exactly, are you trying to accomplish here?

	And besides... (none / 0) (#18)
	by hauntedattics on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 10:31:00 AM PST

	despite his handiness with satire and fascinating dual-income proposal, I don't think zikzak and I could make it work. Anyone who's that into Kinkade is not for me.

	This is not new (none / 0) (#13)
	by Hunsvotti on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 12:09:07 AM PST

	We certainly have faced this before. Reagan and Clinton both screwed up and initiated poor responses to terrorist attacks against our troops overseas. None of the shellings, bombings, etc. that they engaged in took out ANY terrorists. They were viewed with bemusement as impotent by the Middle East. Bush Jr. has at least learned from his predecessors' mistakes. "Making it up as they go along" indeed. You say that we should halt our efforts to stop terrorism immediately and find a solution amicable to everyone on the globe. Well, here's a little status update for you. We could pull out all our troops tomorrow; this would placate the mad Arabs for a time, but we've done that before (Reagan) and we know it isn't a permanent solution. It sends them the message that if they don't like something we have done, all they have to do is kill some of our people, and that it will make us draw back. Additionally, we could load up every last jew on the planet into a giant starship tomorrow and send them off to colonize another planet, and that still wouldn't be enough for Osama and pals. Their version of Islam cannot coexist with other religions, nor even with less totalitarian interpretations of the Koran. They HATE everyone else with a passion. They are currently trying some foreign nationals in Afghanistan for the capitol offense of spreading Christianity. They also slay people without any consequences to themselves, and do so in many inventive ways, such as the ever-popular facelift-without-anaesthetics. Women, Islamic and otherwise, were basically enslaved when the Taliban seized control. They are trying to spread to Pakistan. In fact, there are a number of Taliban supporters in Pakistan already. Their eventual goal is to take over that country. After that, they will simply spread to their next weak neighbor. They believe it is their right and obligation to rule the world with an iron fist. They are a cancer and must be removed for the greater good of the world community. /* Our first step should be the formation of multiple congressional committees tasked with exploring alternative means of stopping suicidal people from flying airplanes into buildings. These commiittees could also perform detailed studies on how the US postal service can be revamped in order to prevent the mailing of Anthrax. / Utter nonsense. Congressional committes are notoriously slow at reaching conclusions, and we already know how to stop people from flying planes into buildings: Air marshalls, reinforced cockpit doors, and passengers who, having seen the events of Sept. 11, are NOT going to put up with hijackings. Every attempt at cockpit tomfoolery since that day has been very forcefully suppressed by passengers, not to mention that we can have F-16s on alert that can be anywhere in the country inside 3 minutes. As far as revamping the postal system, that would take forever. We would have to install expensive sniffing devices in every post office in the nation, and they would have to operate VERY quickly. Billions of dollars, and it might not even be feasible. / We may be under attack, but this is certainly not the time for action. The important thing is to point out all the problems with any military response without suggesting any alternative. In closing, put on your biological warfare suit and drive (don't fly!) to the nation's capital so you too can protest our government's decision to try to protect its citizens. Just because people are trying to kill us (and succeeding) doesn't mean we should behave any differently than we usually do. / This SHOULDN'T be the time for action, but it is. The time for action was over a decade ago. Unfortunately, it didn't happen, and now it is all the harder, but it must be done. These people are bent on our destruction and have been planning this for close to a decade, and that's JUST* al Qaeda. Our "usual" behavior isn't enough this time. We must crush them NOW and instill in them and the rest of our enemies the same fear and respect that Japan and Germany had for us after World War II.

	Is this the starship colonization line for Jews? (none / 0) (#19)
	by Inden on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 02:44:06 PM PST

	Excuse me please mister but could you tell me perhaps maybe if this isn't the place where jewish peoples are to be lining ourselves up for the starship to out of space? Could my Ukrainian wife come with us also please?

	In Case You Hadn't Noticed... (none / 0) (#20)
	by Inden on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 02:48:20 PM PST

	Zikzak meant his remarks sarcastically in case you didn't realize judging from your taking them seriously. [muttering to myself]I swear you have to spoon feed these people sometimes.

	Bomb Them (none / 0) (#5)
	by egg troll on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 12:07:13 PM PST

	We are intervening in the ongoing Afghan civil war as if the Taliban government committed the attack. No. We are pressuring the Taliban because they're supportingd and harboring bin Laden. Sending investigators to the Middle East to question suspects is pointless. At best it would lead to a quagmire of stalling tactics. More likely it would be greeted with, "Oh yes that suspect you were looking for is gone. He is not in our country anymore - snicker - and we don't - giggle - know where he is - titter." Observe how fast the Taliban found bin Laden and put him under "house arrest" once they realized America was turning its military might against them. No, although I'm not given to irrational acts of patriotism I definately agree with how our government is handling this. Posting for the love of the baby Jesus....

	what? (none / 0) (#7)
	by alprazolam on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 01:47:12 PM PST

	Sending investigators to the Middle East to question suspects is pointless Are you suggesting the United States doesn't have the best damn investigators in the world? Why I bet if we wanted to, we could find out whether bin Laden was wearing boxers or briefs at the exact moment the first plane smacked into the tower.

	alprazolam: (none / 0) (#10)
	by Slobodan Milosevic on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 08:33:33 PM PST

	I'll take that bet...

	Boxers or briefs (none / 0) (#11)
	by Hunsvotti on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 11:48:25 PM PST

	Only if we get him to make an appearance on MTV.

	boxers or briefs (none / 0) (#14)
	by Anonymous Reader on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 01:00:51 AM PST

	wouldnt want to check, they say the guy is wired to explode (literally) in case of capture.

	Explode ? (none / 0) (#15)
	by Anonymous Reader on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 07:56:57 AM PST

	Whoooah that would be cool. Huh huh huh huh. Seriously he won't want to be taken alive. If he is anything like other so called muslim lunatics (e.g. Saddam), he probably has a few decoy lookalikes to throw people off the scent.

	well... (none / 0) (#16)
	by Frithiof on Thu Oct 18th, 2001 at 08:57:11 AM PST

	we can always capture one of the lookalikes and humiliate it on public(US) television to boost morale. -Frith

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.