11 Sep
2001
11 Sep
'01
4:19 p.m.
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 cmurillo(a)multi.net.co wrote:
Why? There were likely no more than five or six participants in each of
the four planes. Say, twenty-five people max. Allow a few more at each
of the sirport terminals for whatever function. Fifty total? An
additional core of some indeterminate number who did the planning for
this exercise. Read the flight schedules and aircraft types from
websites on the 'net. Figure which day of the week would likely have
the lightest passenger loads (fewer people to resist). Then Make it
happen - as they did. Millions? More likely a hundres thousand or so.
- don
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Carlos Murillo wrote:
I think you might be right. I jumped to conclusions. It is
just that the organization of this clearly cost millions of
dollars, and there aren't those many terrorist organizations
around with such deep pockets. And I am hoping that whatever retaliation is
taken targets only those
that are guilty, and not innocent bystanders. Most people under
Taleban rule are also victims.
Don't you think it is not only extremely premature but also highly
irresponsible to assume this was an attack carried out by any particular
group?
Remember Oklahoma City? I don't
think this incident calls for ANY retaliation. I think it DOES
call for America to take a moment to reflect on why any particular group
would want to inflict such horror on our nation. People just don't get
up
one day and say "Gee, I think I'll completely raze the World Trade Center
buildings...what fun that would be!"
The way I see it, it just shows that "security" and modern life
as we know it are incompatible. We can't have both, especially
not through military/big brother solutions. A whole different
approach is required to deal with conflicts globally, one in which
none of the parties is bitter enough to try to get revenge.
Remember the WWI armistice and the inhumane conditions it imposed
on the losing side, thus creating the conditions for WWII.
carlos.