Subject:
|
Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Sep 2001 14:53:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
666 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> >
> > So you concede that it is likely that one or more passengers did in fact
> > attack, then?
>
> As I said, it was more likely a charge
Which is a kind of attack.
> - remember they were probably weaponless
Unarmed attacks are nevertheless attacks.
You've been caught in a logical contradiction and unless you can get away
with redefining pacifism to mean something it does not, you're stuck. Admit
it and move on.
Pacifism (as we all know and accept it to mean) would not have accomplished
anything useful on 93. Nothing you can say will change that. There is a
place for pacifism. This wasn't it.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
| (...) An *excellent* point. In addition, your point illustrates a good refutation of the oft-quoted line by Gandhi about "many things are worth dying for, nothing is worth killing for." If, for instance, the passengers had reason to suspect, as they (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
| (...) As I said, it was more likely a charge - remember they were probably weaponless - whether they were intending to hurt the hijackers is anyone's guess. My aim in their position would be (if I had time to think about it): 1. Try and get control (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
55 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
