There have been some good analyses of the 2001 attack. What it came down to is a bunch of amateurs who may or may not have had real links to any known terrorist organisation. Most importantly they merely intended to create a spectacle of flying the planes into prominent buildings and could not have anticipated that the World Trade Center would actually collapse.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Have you ever ordered a product online and received a fake knock-off?
UK airplanes plot an attempt at 'mass murder'
- Thread starter neio
- Start date
If you don't want any part of those freedoms you're, err, free not to partake.
What have Bush and Blair done that has destroyed your freedoms? Being an Anglo-American I can list what they might have done to mine but as a South African how has it directly impacted upon yours?noxibox said:
You're kidding I know (um maybe you're not
) - though - that's what bothers me about this. Much as I can decry the agenda of bush, blair (the rest of the creepy people) I do not want to become a muslim and forswear to the mighty Allah. But this is not what he (Iranian President) is saying - I posted the link sometime back - the 'olive branch' letter sent to bush - Iran has stated all along (much as Iraq stated) they are not interested in nuclear weapons - and I read a report recently that they are at least 10 years away from such a thing (if ever.) (Going back a month to two.)Critics of the muslim faith (the FASCISTS) propose the muslims theory of expansionism when it in fact there is none (Bali bombing? - others?) I am totally against 'the muslim brotherhood' - and other fundamentalist muslim regimes - but I am equally against KKK and white supremacists.
The issues of terrorism insofar as the west is concerned (9/11, previous WTC attack, african embassy bombings) - are never clear-cut - in every incident questions have been raised.
The pacifists would have taken it all the way to baghdad first time around (global opinion at that time) - but the 'powers' stopped at the border - I wonder why?
Debbie
Banned
As much as I hate to admit it, you're right.
It's funny how humans are always making rules for themselves about "how things are". We look at the world around us and we make up rules about it based on our own experiences. Sometimes, when we make what we think is a really good rule, well then we get so excited about this great rule that we give it a whole new name: now we call it a 'principle'. A principle is simply a general rule for oneself about the 'right' way to proceed in any given situation.
A lot of the time, following you own principles will serve you well. But the problem is that sometimes we encounter difficult situations - grey areas - after we have grown into our principles. This new 'grey' situation didn't have a chance to contribute to forming your principles, because your principles were already set by the time you encountered this situation. The natural response when encountering a new and difficult situation is to "follow your principles". The better response should be to re-examine your principles (and maybe reconstruct them....or maybe throw them out altogether....).
I am convinced that if people were to re-examine their own principles over and over, we will eventually conclude the only principle we should uphold for ourselves is the principle that there are no rules. In every situation, the 'right' way to proceed depends. Sometimes following what's 'the right thing to do' will not always be consistent with your principles.
Violence is not consistent with my principles, but I agree with alanf that in some cases not only is it necessary, but it is also truly 'the right thing to do'.
Of course the word 'right' is relative to what it is you are ultimately trying to achieve.
A good leader knows when to break the rules.
Last edited:
Debbie
Banned
bwana I just want to point out that many of the new communications laws in South Africa have been passed under the pretence of anti-terrrorism.
You don't know
Iran can easily stop any chance of so called aggression. Just don't build nukes.
Secondly how can a nation who wants the complete annihilation of a another nation be allowed to have nukes. Plus their link to a terrorist orginization equals serious trouble if they are allowed to develop these weapons.
I highly doubt that. They were against going in to liberate Kuwait in the first place. The good old "it's all for oil" excuse reared it's ugly head again.They would rather strangle the Iraqi people through sanctions.
"Out of sight out of mind"
Yup, and they also tried to push thru legislation to give the gov the right to hold anyone without charges like they did in the apartheid days aparently, no idea what came of it since people were all against it.
Edit:
man i see Denny Crane made an appearance.. I wish sabc/etv showed boston legal.
But here is the shocker.. they claim not to be buildng nukes but doing it for energy. Now before you go ballastic SA too uses nuke power in koeberg but in the coming yrs we will have alot more of them as we try and move away from coal.
Edit:
man i see Denny Crane made an appearance.. I wish sabc/etv showed boston legal.
Last edited:
Yeah, but they were written, passed and enacted by the government of South Africa - cant really blame bush for them can you?
South Africa has not vowed to wipe out any nations or have I missed something here. We don't have such close relations to Hizballah or do we. Also didn't we disarm our nukes. Proving we don't intend on using them. We are also a democracy(a sad example of one at that).
@ Debbie2 & alanf
What is happening in the world today (war) is not the defence of freedom nor is is the 'right thing to do'.
I don't think war or violence is ever 'the right thing to do' as much as it may be the 'only thing to do'.
War and for that matter violence in general can only be justified as a last resort and all recent conflicts have fallen far short of being a last resort.
What is happening in the world today (war) is not the defence of freedom nor is is the 'right thing to do'.
I don't think war or violence is ever 'the right thing to do' as much as it may be the 'only thing to do'.
War and for that matter violence in general can only be justified as a last resort and all recent conflicts have fallen far short of being a last resort.
I understood you the first time. Power Stations are a perfect cover for developing a weapons program. We could restart ours. But due to the reasons above it is safe to assume we will not be doing so any time soon. Unfortunately I have no confidence that the Iranians will show any restraint.
Last edited:
Washington Post reported that the most recent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of Iran’s nuclear program revealed that, “Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years.”
The Bush administration would like you to believe that Iran on the verge of posessing nuclear weapons any day now. There is no evidence of this.
The Bush administration would like you to believe that Iran on the verge of posessing nuclear weapons any day now. There is no evidence of this.
supersunbird
Honorary Master
Now people are complaining that the electronic valuables (cellphones/laptops/mp3 players) they had to put into hold luggage have been getting stolen from thier luggage, even the plastic wrapped bags, I knew this would happen from the start.
If a person can steal stuff from a bag and be unstraceble, what is stopping them from putting a bomb into the bag? Nothing, all this supposed security amounts to nothing, its all bull...
If a person can steal stuff from a bag and be unstraceble, what is stopping them from putting a bomb into the bag? Nothing, all this supposed security amounts to nothing, its all bull...