Guess Who's Planning to Shine Lasers on Pilots

Recently, Jay Beckman posted:

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
Recently, Jay Honeck posted:

There are other cold hard facts to consider here. We aren't dealing
with "a murderer". We're dealing with entire cultures who just
don't happen to appreciate our way of going about things.
[...]

Well, Neil, I hear you -- but I don't believe that our enemies
really care about how we "change our ways."
[...]

Well, they say they *do* care about many of the ways that we insert
ourselves in in their midst. The Palestinian issue; our general
disrespect for Islamic (not even radical) traditions, etc.


Neil,

I lived in Tehran, Iran back in 1976-1977 and therefore had a keen
interest in events that took place there not long after I returned to
the U.S.A. And I try to keep up with the reality as it exists today.

While living there, we were often reminded to respect both the
religious and cultural aspects of Iranian life. We knew when it
might not be safe to be on the streets (passions run high during
Ramadan...) and which parts of town to stay out of.

We learned early on that (at least in Iran) the Middle East is rife
with contradictions. What you see is rarely what you get. I'll
never forget the sight of an Iranian woman jumping over a puddle
while crossing the street and her "Chador" blew open revealing the
fact that she was wearing a very expensive, bright yellow business
suit and yellow 3" stilletto heels. And before anyone asks why she
wasn't stoned on the spot...at the time, the "Chador" was culteral in
nature and not required by any Islamic tennets. Unlike now where the
zealots want to drive Iran (and the rest of the Middle East) back to
the stone age.

After the Embassy was seized, while the TV cameras were focused on the
"mob", I was getting letters from Iranian friends bemoaning the loss
of friends, dollars, goods and all the other things that they came to
know and like about America. The American TV networks even
eventually reported this...of course, they waited until about day 400
of 444 to do so.

Iran and much of the Middle East went, quite litterally, from camels
to cars in a very short space of time. They tasted success and a
modicum of self determination (the Shah not withstanding...he and his
wife (especially) did do some good things in Iran) and I think, in
time, they are going to want it back.

I saw this article...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7103517/...week/?GT1=6305

...and I have to agree with the author. Frankly, the issues in the
Middle East (by and large...) have very little to do with America or
American policies and a whole lot more to do with their own internal
politics and pressures.

I think this is addressing a completely different issue, Jay. Cultures are
not monolithic; not there, not here. Indeed "... most politics (are)
local". The issue of terrorism is not one between the reasonable majority
of either culture. Religious zealots are a problem wherever they are,
there or here.

What motivates people to attack others, sacrificing their lives in the
process? Does that not seem like an act of ultimate desparation, borne out
of frustration and a sense that there is nothing more to lose? People from
all over the world are equally accessible to "them", so I doubt that we
are just a random target in that process. So, how can we simply deny that
there is any credibility to their claims about our role in their neck of
the woods?

Regards,

Neil

What motivates people to attack others, sacrificing their lives in the
process? Does that not seem like an act of ultimate desparation, borne out
of frustration and a sense that there is nothing more to lose?

Actually, it is a sign of mental illness.

I'm eternally amazed that there are people trying to analyze brutal acts of
terror, as if there is some root cause that "we" (whoever "we" are) can
address.

Face facts: People who blow themselves up on a crowded school bus full of
kids are not rational beings. If they were, they would be working to make
the electoral process in Iraq (or Afghanistan, or Iran, or wherever) work
better -- or any of a thousand other positive, constructive acts -- rather
than killing innocents.

To glorify their "cause" by analyzing their motives plays directly into
their hand. They do not deserve such an honor.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Recently, Jay Honeck posted:

What motivates people to attack others, sacrificing their lives in
the process? Does that not seem like an act of ultimate desparation,
borne out of frustration and a sense that there is nothing more to
lose?

Actually, it is a sign of mental illness.

I'm eternally amazed that there are people trying to analyze brutal
acts of terror, as if there is some root cause that "we" (whoever
"we" are) can address.

In other words, you believe that these are purely random acts without any
purpose, and that, for some reason, there are significant number of
mentally ill people willing to perform these acts?

Your comments do a great disservice to all those in our own military who,
facing impossible odds and/or realizing that they must sacrifice their
lives for the benefit of their comrades in arms did not shrink from the
task, but did so willingly. Surely, you aren't suggesting that these
heroes were mentally ill, and that condition allowed them to lay down
their lives for others? It seems to me that what we're talking about is a
matter of perspective. It depends on where one stands and how one sees
one's options that determine actions.

Best regards,

Neil

Neil Gould wrote:

In other words, you believe that these are purely random acts without any
purpose, and that, for some reason, there are significant number of
mentally ill people willing to perform these acts?

Your comments do a great disservice to all those in our own military who,
facing impossible odds and/or realizing that they must sacrifice their
lives for the benefit of their comrades in arms did not shrink from the
task, but did so willingly. Surely, you aren't suggesting that these
heroes were mentally ill, and that condition allowed them to lay down
their lives for others? It seems to me that what we're talking about is a
matter of perspective. It depends on where one stands and how one sees
one's options that determine actions.


I hope you just misunderstood Jay's comments and are not really
confusing the acts of the terrorists with the acts of the U.S. Military.

Regardless of whether or not you consider strapping bombs on your own
children and sending them to blow up other children and their mothers is
rational, it *is* what terrorists do, not our military.

It has long since been obvious that the rational process of the
terrorist and the other 99.9% of the worlds population do not and will
not intersect.

Whether or not it is a matter of perspective as you suggest or mental
illness as Jay suggests no longer matters. The terrorist will not cease
killing until they are forced to.


A bit closer to the topic: CSI had an episode last night where a cargo
plane was brought down by a crackpot with a pocket pen laser. I'm not
sure what impressed me mo the lack of technical competence of the
writers regarding the laser episode itself or the computer reenactments
of the crash!

I hope you just misunderstood Jay's comments and are not really
confusing the acts of the terrorists with the acts of the U.S.
Military.

I fear that's precisely what Neil -- and millions of people just like
him -- are doing.

I actually find that fact scarier than any terrorist threat, simply
because it means the danger is truly from within, where it's much
harder to combat.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article ,
Doug Carter wrote:


I hope you just misunderstood Jay's comments and are not really
confusing the acts of the terrorists with the acts of the U.S. Military.

Regardless of whether or not you consider strapping bombs on your own
children and sending them to blow up other children and their mothers is
rational, it *is* what terrorists do, not our military.

It has long since been obvious that the rational process of the
terrorist and the other 99.9% of the worlds population do not and will
not intersect.

Whether or not it is a matter of perspective as you suggest or mental
illness as Jay suggests no longer matters. The terrorist will not cease
killing until they are forced to.


Though I've crossed keyboards with Jay Honeck on some earlier topics, I
want to associate myself with him and/or with this interpretation of his
comments.

The terrorists we're facing have done the fanatical and very evil things
they've done (and continue to do) primarily because they're fanatics,
with a fanatic and evil understanding of the world and fanatic and evil
religious beliefs, and *not* primarily because of any actions or
policies of the U.S. -- and even as a liberal and blue State resident, I
continue to be dismayed at those among my fellow liberals who foolishly
continue to assert the latter view.

Recently, Doug Carter posted:

Neil Gould wrote:

In other words, you believe that these are purely random acts
without any purpose, and that, for some reason, there are
significant number of mentally ill people willing to perform these
acts?

Your comments do a great disservice to all those in our own military
who, facing impossible odds and/or realizing that they must
sacrifice their lives for the benefit of their comrades in arms did
not shrink from the task, but did so willingly. Surely, you aren't
suggesting that these heroes were mentally ill, and that condition
allowed them to lay down their lives for others? It seems to me that
what we're talking about is a matter of perspective. It depends on
where one stands and how one sees one's options that determine
actions.


I hope you just misunderstood Jay's comments and are not really
confusing the acts of the terrorists with the acts of the U.S.
Military.

Regardless of whether or not you consider strapping bombs on your own
children and sending them to blow up other children and their mothers
is rational, it *is* what terrorists do, not our military.

I'm not confusing the acts, I'm comparing and contrasting them. Are you
aware, for example, that some members of our military had the
responsibility for carrying backpack nuclear weapons? What do you think
the consequences for those individuals would be, had they been used? I
readily accept that the act of war itself is irrational, and all that
implies. But, I'm not under the illusion that we would not choose the very
same actions that "terrorists" use if we believed that they were our only
option.

It has long since been obvious that the rational process of the
terrorist and the other 99.9% of the worlds population do not and will
not intersect.

Agreed.

Whether or not it is a matter of perspective as you suggest or mental
illness as Jay suggests no longer matters.

A lot depends on the definition of "terrorist", no? I believe that we have
to stop using buzzwords and start looking at behaviors. On one hand, we
readily live with "terrorist behaviors" on our own soil, they just don't
involve individuals blowing *themselves* up. Is that a distinction worth
making? I don't think so, but apparently most of us do.

The terrorist will not cease killing until they are forced to.

No... *murderers* will not cease killing until they are forced to. People
that kill for a purpose will presumably stop once the purpose is served.
Or, at least that's the justification we're given for getting into wars.

Regards,

Neil

Recently, Jay Honeck posted:

I hope you just misunderstood Jay's comments and are not really
confusing the acts of the terrorists with the acts of the U.S.
Military.

I fear that's precisely what Neil -- and millions of people just like
him -- are doing.

Well, I disagree, of course. ;-)

I actually find that fact scarier than any terrorist threat, simply
because it means the danger is truly from within, where it's much
harder to combat.

The "fact" is that we have to stop acting scared and deal the terrorist
issue directly. It's naive to think that the attacks on us were random
acts by mentally ill individuals, particularly since the same targets were
hit more than once. "They" told us what their issues with us are, yet we
prefer to think that they don't really mean it. It's pretty clear that we
*still* don't "get it", particularly if you believe that the "danger"
comes from those of us that are trying to get a handle on an effective
approach to dealing with "them". It's pretty clear that attacking Iraq
wasn't the effective approach we needed... did it make you feel safer? Not
me.

Best regards,

Neil

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
m...

I'm not confusing the acts, I'm comparing and contrasting them. Are you
aware, for example, that some members of our military had the
responsibility for carrying backpack nuclear weapons?

Where can I find more information about back-pack nukes? Please cite
a source.

Neil Gould wrote:

I'm not confusing the acts, I'm comparing and contrasting them.

Why? Do you also find it useful to compare and contrast the acts of
serial killers and the police? Terrorists (and I do not shrink from
that term) are a mortal threat to global society, outlaws by any measure
and simply must be stopped by any means, within international law,
necessary.

But, I'm not under the illusion that we would not choose the very
same actions that "terrorists" use if we believed that they were our only
option.

It has never been the policy of the United States to strap bombs to
retarded children and send them into civilian cafes nor take civilian
hostages and cut their throats on television. However these are the
official policies of the organizations on the US and international
terrorist lists.

A lot depends on the definition of "terrorist", no?
Do you struggle with the term "illegal alien" as well? Glossing over
terms doesn't change the underlying reality.

No... *murderers* will not cease killing until they are forced to. People
that kill for a purpose will presumably stop once the purpose is served.
I suppose... but...no; I'm not ready to convert to Islam and give up my
liberty and property to dictators. I prefer to depend on our military
and homeland defense to keep the jackals at bay until the democratic
movements in the Mideast bring about their ultimate defeat.