Re: Re: Re: wallerstein on WTC

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 10:30 AM
>Subject: [PEN-L:17280] Re: Re: wallerstein on WTC


> Ken Hanly wrote:
>
> >Bush has already termed this a war. The terrorist act
> >has created an almost overpowering sense of patriotism and desire
for
> >revenge among the populace.Bush has no choice but to do something
relatively
> >dramatic even if it should involve some US casualties. I doubt
there will be
> >much if any sympathy in the west for the thousands of innocents who
will be
> >killed in Afghanistan or Iraq.
>
> I was away for the weekend, and am a bit behind on email, so this
may
> have been addressed. But U.S. public opinion is a little more subtle
> than this, though of course everything could change once bombs start
> flying. But here's an excerpt from today's Wall Street Journal,
> reporting on a WSJ/NBC poll:
>
> >At the same time, the poll showed a consensus behind the idea of
> >ensuring that targets for American retaliation are fully
> >justifiable. That suggests Mr. Bush isn't under pressure to strike
> >before investigators can pin down responsibility for last week's
> >attacks.
> >
> >"I'd hate to be attacking innocent people who had nothing to do
with
> >it," said Jack Pearson, a 47-year-old printing-company manager in
> >Orlando, Fla., who was among the 81% of respondents saying the U.S.
> >government should "wait to be sure" before striking. But he added,
> >"When we do find out who it was ... attack them very aggressively
> >and take them out completely."
>
> Doug
==========
Yet more proof -- as if we needed any -- that large numbers of the US
citizenry may never understand reification and that, while one may
able to kill people, one cannot kill an idea....

Imagine the US citizenry's puzzlement if they knew/understood Islamic
views on usury...

Ian