From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Sat Jan 18 2003 - 15:02:42 MST
D. Broderick asked:
<<Did the attack on the WTC scare your nation so badly?
Damien Broderick>>
Yes, but probably not enought to take the devil by the horn(s).
To prosecute this war one needs to identify the prime enemy, which happens to
be militant Islam. The president, and all current presidents are in the habit
of kissing Wahabbi ass, to an incendiary degree. The deaths of 3000 Americans
on 9-11 was not too dear a price to pay for saudi petroleum. Alas.
<<Meanwhile, US citizens are slowly being leached of their traditional
liberties. How can free people allow this to happen?>>
We're being slowly leeched because of the lack of political will, to force
the conflict onto Islamic lands, where the issue originates. I note with
glee, that France inexorably Islamist policies have not blunted attacks
against the French, or their oil tankers :-)
Consider that the next surprise attack of consequence, may indeed be an
enhanced fission weapon, sold by Kim Jong IL of North Korea, to Al Qeida and
its Wahabbi funders (not just Saudis), and detonated in the docksides of San
Diego, or near Los Angeles, or San Francisco. Kim, of course, may be
retaliated against, but if Washington, DC is targeted, then whence cometh the
order to strike back? What if Kim denies having anything to do with such a
strike, and what if he is correct?
I would direct all interested parties to this Philadelphia Inquirer article
about theorist, Peter Gale, for elucidation on the threat of Islamic terror.
Thoughtfully cache'd by myself for your convenience.
<A HREF="http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:wHCeepagkzwC:www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/nation/3586541.htm+Peter+Gale+Terrorism&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:wHCeepagkzwC:www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/
nation/3586541.htm+Peter+Gale+Terrorism&hl=en&ie=UTF-8</A>
***In 1998, University of Pennsylvania political science professor Stephen
Gale went to Washington with a warning.He told Federal Aviation
Administration security officials that terrorists might seize airplanes and
fly them into some of the nation's most prized landmarks. Two he mentioned:
the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.No one listened, he said. An FAA
security official told him that scenario fell into the category of threats
the government is powerless to stop - like meteorites.Gale walked out
furious. ****
and..
***An attack on buildings where the nation's electrical grid is balanced, for
example, would disrupt health care systems, shut down computer networks, and
disable fuel pumps, all part of the "essence of modern life." It would
create, he said, the "endgame" in which "we're done.""There ain't no nation
no more," he said. "We'll splinter into a whole bunch of regional segments
that are just going to figure out how to survive. That's it."We have all
sorts of efficiencies built into our system. And the flip side, the dark
force of efficiency, is vulnerability." ***
I once stated that when the war comes to the Aussie mainland, many
Australians will first blame America for getting it involved on the war on
terror, and thus making Australia a victim of Islamic "rage." I, indeed,
encountered this, right after the Bali attack, in a Yahoo chat.
The threats need to be moved back to Islamic lands where the problem
originates. Because they can't play well with others, or can't adapt to
modernism very well is nobodies fault. But the threat is serious and the
aggression, needs to be dealt with seriously. If W wants to undermine Iraq
as a first step to easing reliance on the House of Ibn Saud, this is not an
issue for me.
Finally, we do need to work on an energy policy, that does not include
petroleum from Islamist states.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 17:10:21 MST