Flight 93

**Butterfly** · 05-06-2006, 09:37 PM

Ok this is the short version

In the 1950s Sayyed Qutb, an Egyptian civil servant turned revolutionary, and Leo Strauss, an American professor of political philosophy, both came to see western liberalism as corrosive to morality and to society. Qutb had been sent to the U.S. to learn about its public education system but was disgusted by what he saw of its society. They each argued that radical measures, including deception and (in Qutb's case) even violence, could be justified in an effort to restore shared moral values to society, and their arguments heavily influenced radical Islamism and American neo-conservatism, respectively. Senior American civil servants and politicians influenced by neo-conservatism came to believe anti-communist propaganda and saw it as an evil force against which the U.S. should be presented as a force for good. This propaganda included Donald Rumsfeld's over-estimation of Soviet military technology and the William Casey-led CIA assertion that various terrorist organisations were backed by the Soviet Union. Meanwhile Qutb became influential in the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and was then jailed after some of its members attempted to assassinate President Nasser.

**Boon Mee** · 06-06-2006, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

^
Does anyone still believe that's what happened??

You recall the cell phone conversations on all three airplanes just before they crashed?
Are you saying it's all one big conspiracy?

**baldrick** · 06-06-2006, 04:47 AM

In common with all the nutters :-

1: They all believe in a 'god'
2: They all believe they are part of the chosen few
3: Not one of them will believe in natural evolution

**Gerbil** · 06-06-2006, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

^
Does anyone still believe that's what happened??

You recall the cell phone conversations on all three airplanes just before they crashed?
Are you saying it's all one big conspiracy?

Yep!

More food for thought:

http://www.rense.com/general56/flfight.htm

http://www.rense.com/general68/911h.htm

**attaboy** · 07-06-2006, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by Butterfly

^^ They were doing a job, like US service men bombarding thousands of civilians safely from 10,000 feet. At least they had the courage to go through that process. We might not agree with their statement or what they stand for but we can't hardly say if they were "really evils". Evil is much more cruel in my book. And what is evil ? I mean the definition itself might bring more questions than answers.

They were only carrying out instructions. They delivered their message, end of mission. Too bad they missed the WH though. It would have given another dimension to the whole episode.

Is their "courage" something to be admired? The hands on up close slitting of throats and sawing of heads of defenseless people is courageous? Is it admirable? We teach our soldiers and citizens to resist their most base instincts. Their govenments have their own citizens attend beheadings or participate in the stoning of criminals to death. What kind of message does that send? Maybe a message of terror and intimidation? A message that your fellow citizen is capable of murder and just might murder you if he gets wound up enough? It's a system which encourages terror amongst it's own people sanctioned by religious text. It's a system which encourages the general population to be givers and takers of terror and intimidation.

**stroller** · 07-06-2006, 11:25 AM

"They were only carrying out instructions." doesn't absolve them from responsibility, either. A dangerous thing to say.

**Butterfly** · 07-06-2006, 12:28 PM

^ agree, but when you take your life with it, it's a little bit more than just a simple act. It does take some kind of courage and commitment to do it. Ask SK if he would become a suicide bomber if it could help his country, I am sure he would.

Thread: Flight 93

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions