Re: Re: Re: Re: the attack

["Andrew Hagen" <xah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I disagree. IMHO, the attack was cowardly. They attacked defenseless
people. Only cowards do such things.

There is an assumption that the tactic of secrecy was necessary. This
softly implies that the attack itself was necessary. Not only would
that statement be wrong, it would be a hideous lie.

respectfully,

Andrew Hagen
xah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 14:46:57 -0500, Ken Hanly wrote:

>What has having support from a group or country got to do with its being
>"cowardly"?
>Keeping the affiliation secret is hardly cowardly. It is a tactical
>necessity. To reveal affiliation is to invite immediate reprisal. It just
>seems simple prudence. And many in the US will not care that many innocent
>people may be killed in retaliation. There are already suggestions about
>attacks on Afghansitan.
>If attacking defenceless civilians is cowardly then Hirsohima must surely
>take the prize for cowardly acts and of course
>a number of bombing missions against Serbia. And certainly CHurchill who
>bombed Dresden and gassed Kurds is one of the greatest cowards of our time.
>
>Cheers, Ken Hanly
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Andrew Hagen <xah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 3:04 PM
>Subject: [PEN-L:16950] Re: Re: the attack
>
>
>> The attack is cowardly because the attackers must have had support from
>> some group or country. Yet, all concerned have kept their affiliations
>> secret. They have attacked civilians, who had no way of defending
>> themselves. For these reasons and others, they are cowards.
>>
>> What personal gain did the criminals get? Personal aggrandizement,
>> fame, and a sick kind of grandeur.
>>
>> I realize that you have raised intellectually telling points, and I
>> have responded emotionally. I apologize if my reply is off the mark.
>>
>> Andrew Hagen
>> xah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 11 Sep 2001 12:33:04 -0500, Ken Hanly wrote:
>>
>> >How can the attack be cowardly? The attackers gave up their lives in most
>> >instances. They were willing to die to achieve their goals. That is
>hardly
>> >cowardly.
>> >Are you saying that people willing to put their lives on the line for
>their
>> >beliefs are cowards. Explain that please. Criminals usually break the law
>> >for personal gain.
>> >What personal gain did these terrorists obtain? Do you know of criminals
>who
>> >knowingly and deliberately kill themselves as part of their crime. Surely
>> >rare, and ususally they would be crimes of passion cum suicide.
>> >
>> >
>> >Cheers, Ken  Hanly
>> >
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: Andrew Hagen <xah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 1:02 PM
>> >Subject: [PEN-L:16943] the attack
>> >
>> >
>> >> Is everybody okay? I think Doug lives in the NYC area. Does anyone else
>> >> live there?
>> >>
>> >> This attack disgusts me and should disgust the entire left and
>> >> anti-globalization movement. This attack is cowardly, unjustified, and
>> >> totally evil. The perpetrators are criminals of the worst kind.
>> >>
>> >> As for civil liberties, sometimes they must be sacrificed to preserve
>> >> public safety. This is such a time. The point we can make is that any
>> >> limitation on liberty should be temporary until the danger passes.
>> >>
>> >> Take care everyone.
>> >>
>> >> Andrew Hagen
>> >> xah@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>