Jump to content

9/11 - Have we learned anything?


DJKillaQueen

Recommended Posts

There's a very good article in the Independent today by Robert Fisk. He heads it with 'Nine years, two wars, hundreds of thousands dead - and nothing learnt'.


His argues that why should we suprised that the apotheosis of 9/11 should be a crackpot preacher threatening a Nazi-style book burning over a would be mosque, two blocks from ground zero - 'as if 9/11 was an onslaught on Jesus-worshipping Christians, rather than on the atheist West'?


He makes the case that 9/11 served only to spawn even more crackpots and that the 'war on terror' has done nothing to quell the rise of them in increased numbers - kill one, ten more appear (the pastor being just the latest).


The winner in all this is not peace and democrasy but the arms trade which has done very nicely indeed (make what you will of that).


And all of them, the crackpots, terrorists, insurgents and Bush, Blair talk to God.


He points out that the central issue is Isreal and the West's support of her, nothing has changed there but we conveniently ignore that. The conflict of Isreal and Palastine is at the heart of the War on Terror as much a 9/11.


More importantly....the animosity between Islam and the West is as huge as it's ever been and idiots like Pastor Jones ensure it won't go away anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Invasion of Iraq was nothing to do with 9/11, though it was billed as a war on terror, whatever that is. Iraq was at least in part about oil. There's a brilliant documentary about the history on this and how the US government story changed as the US public failed to respond to the need for a war for oil (with footage of the changing story, as I recall). I'll try and find the link. Israel will also be in any Middle East story.


Magpie: how have any actions taken since 9/11 prevented anything? What actions, and what have they prevented?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Magpie Wrote:

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

> Well one could argue that the actions taken since

> 9/11 have prevented a repeat of 9/11 on US soil,

> and hence have, to some extent been successful.


But the actions since 9/11 may well have fuelled anti-American/Western feelings enough to provoke further attacks in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"How have any actions taken since 9/11 prevented anything? What actions, and what have they prevented?"


From a US-Centric approach - the actions taken by the US - ie aggressive pursuit of Al-Queada/Bin Laden, and increased homeland security measures, have prevented any further large scale Islamic terrorist attacks on US soil, and on that basis have been successful.


Anti-Western/US/British sentiment will always be there (whether justified or not) as it is used by the various governments in the region as a smoke scene behind which their failures to deliver freedom, economic growth etc are hidden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It?s entirely possible that nothing of the like would have happened again anyway tho, right?


Major events like that, by their nature just are rare


Timothy Mcveigh exploding a bomb in Oklahoma didn?t precipitate a wave of similar homegrown attacks


One of the things that bugs me most about current flight restrictions is the 100ml fluids thing ? which didn?t come in until several years after 9/11. So the worlds ?experts? looked at all possible avenues of attack after 9/11 and thought about EVERYTHING to prevent something like this happening again only to find ?ooops? ? fluids can be used for nefarious purposes


It doesn?t instill confidence does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that you can argue that one action 'prevents' another until the same situation has repeated itself so many times that the probability of cause leading to effect is 100%.


The unfolding of history is an uncontrolled experiment. We'll never know what 'might' have happened.


However, here's one option. As an alternative to a military war that Saddam knew he was likely to lose, he concentrated on an economic war, investing heavily in driving up prices from the oil fields of the Middle East and Venezuela.


Coupled with the inevitable collapse of the sub-prime housing market, the double whammy with high oil prices resulted in a collapse so sudden and precipitate that it exceeded the ability of western governments to control it through quantitative easing.


Russia saw it's chance and started cutting off gas supplies to Western Europe on the basis of unpaid bills - an argument it uses frequently with Eastern European client states.


Under the shadow of dried up power stations and street riots that were killing hundreds every night, the West embarked on a War for Oil in the middle east that, because of its swiftness, couldn't be so easily covered up as a compassionate liberation.


The lack of political compromise drew both Russia and China onto the opposite sides into a fireballing conflict in the Middle East and.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well of course its impossible to prove that action taken results in an event not happening. However, the absence of proof does not mean that the action was not successful.


How about another counterfactual - what action should the US have taken after 9/11?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And more importantly, what do people think the outcome of this 'new' history would have been?


Can I just remind people that firstly most people most places in the world are perfectly friendly, and have less 'anti-someone else' thinking than the average resident of Beckenham.


Secondly, where it can be found, the majority of anti-western thinking elsewhere in the world has little to do with the Iraqi war and mostly to do with the ongoing economic rape of their resources.


Chinese people don't like it when westerners tell them they have to live in the dark and the cold so that a pasty faced fat bastard can drive an SUV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

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

> It?s entirely possible that nothing of the like

> would have happened again anyway tho, right?

>

> Major events like that, by their nature just are

> rare

>

> Timothy Mcveigh exploding a bomb in Oklahoma

> didn?t precipitate a wave of similar homegrown

> attacks


Exactly, Sean. And each event tends to be different. So they are alike only in the sense of being major.


It is therefore difficult to know what measures could be taken that could have any effect.


And even when you decide which measures you might want to implement, it can be impractical to do so.

Hence we do not have 'security theatre' for anyone attempting to join a Tube train or to board a surface train, despite major incidents having taken place on both of those (UK, Spain).


>

> One of the things that bugs me most about current

> flight restrictions is the 100ml fluids thing ?

> which didn?t come in until several years after

> 9/11. So the worlds ?experts? looked at all

> possible avenues of attack after 9/11 and thought

> about EVERYTHING to prevent something like this

> happening again only to find ?ooops? ? fluids can

> be used for nefarious purposes

>

> It doesn?t instill confidence does it?


It's all part of 'security theatre'. (See Bruce Schneier's writings.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The Taliban or Al-Qaeda?

I think it's generally accepted that the Taliban were the brainchild of the ISI isn't it?


It is a very good documentary, but like Curtis' other work somewhat overeggs the pudding. That's not to say he doesnt have valuable insights.

The Trap is well worth a watch too, though less relevant now New Labour is dead (it must be true, red ed sed so).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hmm, well a very quick dip into Hegel's dialectic and I'm already getting the impression you've not thought about it deeply, but are parroting people who also seem to have totally misinterpreted it.


As far as I can see it says that social forces veer one way then in an opposite direction and so forth in a manner of conflict (not meant to be interpreted as literal conflict) until some kind of resolution (sysnthesis) is arrived at.

It doesn't say that Kissinger fostered conflict in order to control your mind.


As for the conspiracy stuff, oh dear.


Incidentally I've just finished reading Jon Ronson's Psycopath Test, where he suggests that conspiracy theorists are mentally ill and quite possible psycopathic with regards to at least:

Grandiose sense of self-worth

Lack of empathy

Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

Lack of realistic long-term goals


;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

El Pibe Wrote:

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

> Hmm, well a very quick dip into Hegel's dialectic

> and I'm already getting the impression you've not

> thought about it deeply, but are parroting people

> who also seem to have totally misinterpreted it.

>

> As far as I can see it says that social forces

> veer one way then in an opposite direction and so

> forth in a manner of conflict (not meant to be

> interpreted as literal conflict) until some kind

> of resolution (sysnthesis) is arrived at.

> It doesn't say that Kissinger fostered conflict in

> order to control your mind.

>

> As for the conspiracy stuff, oh dear.

>

> Incidentally I've just finished reading Jon

> Ronson's Psycopath Test, where he suggests that

> conspiracy theorists are mentally ill and quite

> possible psycopathic with regards to at least:

> Grandiose sense of self-worth

> Lack of empathy

> Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

> Lack of realistic long-term goals

>

> ;-)



?Conspiracy? is prosecuted in most Court systems.

Conspiracy to defraud.

Conspiracy to steal.


But then again the court system is somewhat psychopathic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • A repetitive tried and tested cycle that seems to be slowing down in London thankfully. Brixton was the start. Councils consciously and purposely let an area decline until that area is next on the list for social and ethnic cleansing and ultimately gentrification. In come the first wave of arty/ creatives to squat and house share. A few coffee shops and cool but inexpensive cafe/ bars and art spaces open up. The crackheads, dealers and other assorted criminals who were once left to operate openly and brazenly to sell, shop lift, mug, beg, purchase,  publicly consume on decent folks doorsteps, stairwells,in bin sheds and without fear of the law begin to be targeted, rounded up and moved on. A few more jaunty and sustainable coffee shops/ bars appear . The Guardian and other facilitators in the media jump on the bandwagon, first claims of vibrancy are rolled out. Next step a few cool retro clothing shops pop up selling ' reclaimed Levi's for more than they originally cost and ten times the price of what the recently departed charity shop charged. Foxtons open a branch and the arty types and first wavers/ drivers have there first moan about there initially paltry rents going up. The guardian do a generic lets move to Brixton, Dalston, Hackney, Deptford, Walthamstow type double pager. Interview a graphic designer or two who have just bought a former crack den on the manor for next to peanuts. They will later bemoan the next wave who have more money than them. Cool, edgy and vibrant are now the buzzword bingo must use lingo. Few more coffee shops ( how original ) Pop up everything,. Organic and sour dough move in. The night time economy starts to thrive, more cool bars and eateries open. More squats and the last crack house that was once one of many are cleared out. Second wave is around the corner.   All of a sudden there's a visible police presence again and the streets are safe for fun seekers with plenty of disposable cash to chuck about on a dose of vibrancy with added coolness. By this stage even the locally brewed beer is organic. There's queues outside the newly arrived organic, sourdough, artisan and sustainable bakers. Instagram has Brixton trending. The greasy spoon of thirty year has gone cause the lease is up and the landlord has hiked the rents up by 60/70%. Followed by small family run independents that served the community  for decades and more.  The local characters, activists, eccentrics are getting less and less. There's a new show in town for a week or two and until the next brand arrives. Brewdog move in. Former job centres are converted into bars but peak edginess means it's still called the job centre. Followed by a couple more chain eateries. The resident DJ'S and music venues are replaced by another generic brand boasting guest chefs. The Guardian lifestyle section is now on it's fifth or sixth orgasm. Turn a few pages and hypocrisy is rampant with articles on the evils of gentrification, foxtons, capitalism, social cleansing and unaffordable housing. The middle classes continue to arrive in there droves to buy into the vibrancy and multiculturalism supposedly on offer. There isn't much multiculturalism going on at the packed latest place to eat, drink and fart. The multiculturalism on show comes in the form of bar staff, doorman and cheap as chips uber drivers and delivery workers. Rice and peas, jerk everything, red stripe at six quid a can from some hipster haunt that is currently flavour of the month and the place to be seen. The first wavers are now blaming the latest hedge funded brand that's pulled into town for driving gentrification and there soon to be hastened departure to be first wavers again somewhere else. Less cool but up and coming here we come. Covid has certainly helped/ been a factor in slowing down the process of gentrification. I also think it may be the driver for almost putting a stop to it. Remote working, less need to move to London to be near an office, less disposable cash, sky high rents, worthless degrees that relied on that disposable cash , different priorities, knife and gang crime and a large dose of much needed realism has put a huge spanner in the works for the shitty process and cycle that is/ was the gentrification and social cleansing of working class London. Manchester and Liverpool is next on the list for the planners. Thankfully.
    • Can you just queue up to withdraw cash or are other transactions like stamp purchasing required?  Do M&S do cash back?
    • Or don't stop using cash. Stop using your phone or even your watch as a banknote. At the same time avoid the risk of having your card cloned at cash points, by hand held card readers, oyster readers and point-of sale terminals to name a few. God only knows how much damage we're doing to the planet because all the above must require a hell of a lot of resources and juice from the grid. It won't happen though. I know of quite a few people who deem carrying cash about as a pain/ chore. But not a big lump of plastic with a screen and full of personal information that can be easily gleamed. I feel the same about carrying a phone about so i don't most of the time. I'll be in the minority but certainly don't see or treat a phone as a necessity.  You can't get a banknote out of your sky rocket with a phone in your hand. It's become a source of dopamine for many. It's an addiction for many. They're an easy target for thieves. They're a godsend to cyber fraudsters who are stealing billions and are doing so without the need of cash points.
    • There used to be an Osteopath at The Gardens (not physio) but they have since left.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...