h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

As a liberal minded, well educated American, I can understand your plea that the U.S. not start a war over the attacks in New York and Washington. I absolutely abhore violence and have long considered myself a pacifist. However, as an American, I can tell you that this country has been rocked to its very foundations by these events. Potentially more Americans were killed yesterday than during any single year of the Vietnam War. Many of us feel that the time for political correctness with respect to dealing with terrorists is over. If it was Bin Laden, to hell with Afghanistan's borders, we should send our military in and get him with or without European support. If the Taliban is harboring him, it is time to end their reign in that country. No token response such as those our military undertook with respsect to the bombing of the embassies in Africa in 1998 will ever restore our sense of security. We must strike back at those responsible, whether individual groups or national governments with all means necessary once we have significant evidence of their guilt. It is time to take the war to them and make them realize that any attacks on freedom loving people will result in significant pain for them and their people. The time for diplomacy is over!! If they can do this to New York and D.C., they can certainly do it to London, Berlin, Madrid, Rome or Paris.

Coudn't agree with you more, the autist formerly known as flinch.

The bottom line is, as always, money. The WTC makes perfect sense as a target, more so than the White House and the Pentagon. Today corporations rule rather than governments - just go ask George W Bush and his Oil tycoon buddies. Motivation for a world order is not freedom and democracy, but to sustain the capitalist system that rules. This is the real agenda behind western interventions in middle eastern issues (if peace and democracy were the agenda, where was the west when the horrors unfolded in Rwanda?).

Money makes the world go round and bombs go off.

L

To the autistic kid formerly known as flinch, youre argument is weak at best and you’ve proven nothing. Furthermore you contradict yourself and your lack of knowledge is amusing. But most importantly you tell a very one-sided story. Nothing in this world is so cut and dry, day and night, yet you make things out to be that way. You sound like a member of the terrorist group, it’s very interesting. You could probably be connected with them.

You say - The Americans have done this around the globe, it makes me sick when you hear them talking about "defending democracy" when they have systematically waged war on popular democracies to install right wing puppet regimes. Well, no country is necessarily the good guys or has perfect policies; the world is an imperfect place. But Americans have not hijacked planes and flown them into civilian buildings either.

You speak like a true terrorist.

To the autistic kid formerly known as flinch, youre argument is weak at best and you’ve proven nothing. Furthermore you contradict yourself and your lack of knowledge is amusing. But most importantly you tell a very one-sided story. Nothing in this world is so cut and dry, day and night, yet you make things out to be that way. You sound like a member of the terrorist group, it’s very interesting. You could probably be connected with them.

You say - The Americans have done this around the globe, it makes me sick when you hear them talking about "defending democracy" when they have systematically waged war on popular democracies to install right wing puppet regimes. Well, no country is necessarily the good guys or has perfect policies; the world is an imperfect place. But Americans have not hijacked planes and flown them into civilian buildings either.

You speak like a true terrorist.

It makes sense to want to wipe out terrorism. But hunting down people/groups in other countries, and basically declaring war on "any country that harboured these people" is insane. It is terrorism on a political scale. Whilst it is (unfortunately) natural to want revenge on the people who have offended against us, particularly in such a massive way, what is needed now is cooperation between all the nations of the world. Besides, the focus is still outside the US - what country do these people think has been 'harbouring' these terroists for the weeks, months it would have taken to organise this? I fear for the world - not because of terrorism, but because of the US response to terrorism. There is no solace to be gained from acheiving parity of body count.

People are looking for people to blame, or looking for where the cycle of hatred started. It doesn't matter for the moment why this happened. Noone even knows who is responsible, there are just a lot of wild assumptions going around. NOONE KNOWS WHO IS RESPONSIBLE! Remember that! There is nothing to say that this wasn't planned entirely inside US borders. Don't just swallow racism and jingoism uncritically. A bag full of learn how to fly books and videos in Arabic is so flimsy as evidence as to almost be a joke. Thousands of people have died today, and in the end maybe one out of every thousand of them will have been connected to whatever the reason ends up being. If the US government makes "no distinction between the people responsible for these actions and those who harboured them" as President Bush said, and strikes out in retaliation, then thousands more may die, again maybe 1 out of a thousand of whom will have had any connection to this. Death counts cannot be made to balance. Violence does not sooth the damage done by violence. Terrorism is still terrorism whether carried out by an individual, a faction, or a government, and the vast majority of people who die as a result will not care what the difference was. NOTHING can justify it.

And President George W. Bush just declared war... on noone and everyone. Stand by for 'collateral damage'.

Researcher 184153, I'm saddened to see you refer to the autistic kid formerly known as flinch as a 'terrorist'. This kind of verbal aggression is not only totally unnecessary and disrespectful but also in very bad taste.

You should read up about the history of US and how the US has helped fuel wars and terrorist activities around the globe. The only difference being that the US has been subtle.

It makes sense to want to wipe out terrorism. But hunting down people/groups in other countries, and basically declaring war on "any country that harboured these people" is insane. It is terrorism on a political scale. Whilst it is (unfortunately) natural to want revenge on the people who have offended against us, particularly in such a massive way, what is needed now is cooperation between all the nations of the world. Besides, the focus is still outside the US - what country do these people think has been 'harbouring' these terroists for the weeks, months it would have taken to organise this? I fear for the world - not because of terrorism, but because of the US response to terrorism. There is no solace to be gained from acheiving parity of body count.

People are looking for people to blame, or looking for where the cycle of hatred started. It doesn't matter for the moment why this happened. Noone even knows who is responsible, there are just a lot of wild assumptions going around. NOONE KNOWS WHO IS RESPONSIBLE! Remember that! There is nothing to say that this wasn't planned entirely inside US borders. Don't just swallow racism and jingoism uncritically. A bag full of learn how to fly books and videos in Arabic is so flimsy as evidence as to almost be a joke. Thousands of people have died today, and in the end maybe one out of every thousand of them will have been connected to whatever the reason ends up being. If the US government makes "no distinction between the people responsible for these actions and those who harboured them" as President Bush said, and strikes out in retaliation, then thousands more may die, again maybe 1 out of a thousand of whom will have had any connection to this. Death counts cannot be made to balance. Violence does not sooth the damage done by violence. Terrorism is still terrorism whether carried out by an individual, a faction, or a government, and the vast majority of people who die as a result will not care what the difference was. NOTHING can justify it.

And President George W. Bush just declared war... on noone and everyone. Stand by for 'collateral damage'.

Whoa!

Speculating now about the who and the why of yesterdays atrocity is helps nothing or no-one.

Autist: No-one, no country deserves to be terrorized. No argument can be forwarded that can justify the events of yesterday or similar acts of violence.

184153: I understand that a lot of people are very upset and angry and that calling for a responce back is only natural - but I caution anyone that only one day since the attack started it is far too early to seek out those responsible before all the facts are out.

No-one here is a terrorist. This is the problem of people suggesting their pet theories about who was behind the attack yesterday, people are angry and end up taking it out on one and other.

-----------------------

I will not let this thread descend into a futile and destructive flame-war. Please just keep all postings civil. If you want to add something meaningful to this debate leave a message in the condoleneces forum.

Clive.

I was just upset that there are people justifying the act of terrorism. No doubt, the US has done shady things, Im not debating that. But the US doesn’t deliberately attack civilians either. Some of the people writing made it terrorism sound like an acceptable plan of action when it is clearly not. The truth is, every country out there is done horrible things to someone somewhere, no ones slate is clean nor perfect, but terrorism like this is unwarranted no matter how some fanatic goon wants to justify it.

Excuse me, but I think that the name-calling is out of line here.

Calling someone a terrorist because s/he has expressed an unpopular opinion diminishes the meaning of a word that should be reserved for people who blow up themselves and other for the sake of politics. As a fellow Researcher, I would request that you kindly keep a civil tongue in your head, or civil fingers on the keyboard in this case.

As for yesterday's attacks, I am as upset and shaken as any American, and I am certainly not thrilled to work in a government building today. I'm willing to concede the point that our government needs to tread more carefully when it comes to foreign relations, particularly in Africa and the Middle East...but crashing a commercial airline into a building is an utterly unacceptable way to communicate that message.

If and when we can discover who is responsible for these acts AND we can prove it, I would hope that whatever nation the perpetrator(s)reside in would cooperate in an extradition. If not, there are many different ways to handle the situation, and I hope that our government would choose a tidy, quiet one. It is not in ANYONE's best interests to destabilize the Middle East, but at the same time, neither is allowing this sort of thing to continue by failing to prosecute the guilty parties. Just because it happened here first doesn't mean it won't happen in another country.

Yes I absolutely agree with 184104. We are all deeply upset by this dreadful act against humanity and those who commited the crime must be brought to justice. But we (and not least of all President Bush) have a responsibility to keep this world in one piece and to strive for peace, so any action taken MUST be carefully considered and must not simply be a demonstration by America of its ability to destroy any enemy. To be honest I am very concerned, America shows no reluctance to put its military forces into action even when it is not directly involed in the issue, so what Bush might do in response to a direct attack on America does not bear thinking about. Like you said, we do not want another war and I believe that every effort should be made by those in power to prevent it.

Right - just had nip off for some dinner. I am sorry that I had to be a bit snippy before. I realise lots of people are terribly upset by this appaling tragedy we are all thinking and praying for those people in america reeling from the news. I was just genuinely concerned that out of that high-emtion things would be said, someone would get annoyed and before you know it, everything's gone horribly wrong.

No hard feeling, okay?

Clive

I don't think retaliation is appropriate. It only continues the endless spiral of violence. The perpetrators, in their twisted minds, probably consider their actions as retaliation for previous wrong doings: Maybe Waco, Ruby Ridge or Bush's father's slaughter of 100,000 under trained, poorly equipped Iraqi conscripted soldiers. We certainly don't need a botched military action with "collateral" damage to the already suffering Afghan people. (I've spent some time in the north west of Pakistan and seen the refugee camps.)
The solution lies in increased security and intelligence. For example, El Al hasn't had a hi-jacking in 30 years, so it's possible. It may mean some inconvenience and increased cost.

Gosh, I think this whole situation is scary. First of all, someone out there dislikes "america" so much that they 'bombed' them. Secondly, that group of people also has enough intelligence to hijack four planes simultaneously. Thirdly, these people were willing to die for their cause, whatever it may be.

I also find it scary that US intelligence did not see this coming. AAAAHHH! This could happen again. I do think this calls for the US government to take a serious look at foreign policy (not too much of which has been popular recently).

I would also like to say that many good points have been made about past injustices, and generally shady behavior by the American government. But an eye for an eye just gives us blind people (Ghandi). There can be no justification for bombing innocent people.

I think this tragic event will change the way government' think. At least, I hope so.

You know, I won’t name call, but on the same token lets try and NOT be stupid. Trying to justify what happened; no matter what group did it is complete nonsense. And given the anonymity the internet provides, who knows if the autistic kid formerly known as prince does have some sort of shady connection – none of you know that. Also all the talk of the US being a terrorist and picking on these poor little countries that never did anything to anyone, sounds like Osama Bin Laden talk. Like I said before, its not cut and dry, the US has done a lot of questionable things, but so hasn’t everyone else. Some one picked a fight, the US got sucker punched so to speak, and when they go to respond – I read all of this, well lets hope that US doesnt do anything because theyre the bad guys here. Forget that, the people writing on this board sound like a bunch of little fascists supporting Osama and his terrorist gang. If someone so much as broke wind in the direction of the queen people would be up in arms, but that would be different right?

This post has been removed.

I hope it hasn't escaped our American friends notice that TERRORISM isn't just something that happens to 'the Irish' or whoever. Most of my countrymen are as deeply opposed to any terrorism from wherever it comes, but when we find that Americans are subsidising the IRA who specialise in blowing-up innocent women and children, we do wonder whose side they are on !!

Can the moderation team not intefere with political debate. Political debate is, and it should be, confrontational, provocative, combative, and often unpleasant. However, it is preferable to physical confrontation. Sadly it is indicative of the state of the British media that the BBC finds it necessary to censor views, however repulsive they may be to some other people. Clearly the current British government wishes the people of Britain to be politically impotent and the BBC is assisting the government to ahcieve this. If another 'researcher' has posted something that may offend let the other researchers like myself deal with that: You have seen the censored posting, has it affected you psychologically? Stop falling into line with Blair and his scum by dumbing down the activity of debate.

Postings that might contraviene the Terms + Condition (inc The House Rules ) - those thing we *all* signed up to when joing the site - are "hidden pending moderation" until they are reviewed by one of the Italics.

Offensive postings can also be "yikesed" by researchers and are submitted again for review.

It's not political stiffling, moderation isn't pretty I admit but 'dems da rules.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/HouseRules

Clive.

I posted some comments earlier which have ben removed by the moderators, and subsequent attempts to repost have been blocked. The comments I made expressed a left-wing viewpoint of the recent attack on the USA and expressed support for the attack as well as heavily criticising acts of war by the US government over the last fifty years. The only reason that these comments were removed was their political content. That is, they were censored because they expressed a view that the BBC in its position as promoter of only the prevailing political outlook, wished to deny. Clearly the BBC, in accordance with the British government's policy does not allow any vies that are blatantly left-wing to be broadcast. As such the BBC has violated the law with respect to its right to have a licence to broadcast.

Clive, do you claim to be so dumbed down by Blair that you really think there is a legitimate reson for not broadcasting my original remarks? Whatever your regulations may say, the BBC has legal repsonsibilities that you seem to ignore