To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 13053
13052  |  13054
Subject: 
Re: Thinking Out Loud...
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 22 Sep 2001 01:19:08 GMT
Viewed: 
685 times
  
Ross Crawford wrote:

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 - 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 of the plane from them, or
2. Try to distract the "pilot" enough so he can't get them to their intended
destination.

Both of these can be acheived without violence. Whether they were or not is
unknown.

This is one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen on this whole topic.

Without violence?  How ludicrous!  "Please Mr. Terrorist, can I have control of the
plane?"  "Why sure you can, good man, here you go"

Passive resistance taking a plane back from terrorists that took a plane by
force???

THINK, man!




I grant that we may never know for certain, but submit that
the evidence is very strongly pointing in that direction.

Therefore the passenger or passengers who did in fact attack (the "heroes",
as I put it)are not pacifists.

By all reports there were several passengers involved. Some may have been
intent on hurting the hijackers, others may have had similar aims to those
above. Are those who didn't intend violence (if any) any less heroes?

No, they aren't.   And I doubt anyone would say they were not.  But it took ACTION
to stop that plane.

I haven't seen anyone here mention yet that Todd Beamer was something like a 3rd
level blackbelt.  I can't remember the exact specifics, but he WAS well trained.
Good thing, since evidently many of the terrorists had been taking self-defense
courses.


There is no way to "attack" and be a
"pacifist". The terms are incompatible.

If you assume they intended violence, of course you can prove they're not
pacifists.

1 - they knew other planes had been used as weapons
2 - at least one of 4 men, Todd Beamer, told his wife on the phone that they were
going to "do something"
3 - an Airphone was still on as Todd Beamer got up from his seat, and screams were
heard soon after
4 - the plane crashed, and NOT in DC

THINK.  Start your brain up and THINK.


--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs



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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR