Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Is the 911 Attack Triggering A Fourth Turning? - Page 21







Post#501 at 09-22-2001 07:16 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
09-22-2001, 07:16 PM #501
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Marc, I don't agree with MMurray, but he/she is no more a kook than you are. Less, I would hope.


I think it's easy to exaggerate the role of religion in this Crisis. That's as much as allowing our enemies in its early phases to define the dimensions and the issues. Those issues will be economic and ecological, at least as much as they are military.


What I meant by the example of the Nazis was that we don't have to allow the foe to define who we are merely by our opposition. That the Nazis emerged in a Christian culture is not relevant to the point; that they were fanatical enemies of Jews and Communists is. We did not have to convert to Judaism nor to become Communists in order to fight them, and we do not have to become Crusaders in order to fight bin Laden and his ilk.


Actually, come to think of it, fundamentalist Christians are not the people for whom bin Laden reserves his true ire. Secularists are -- those who determine society's laws in accordance with the welfare of the people, not the dictates of God, be that God Christian or Muslim. If we did become a fundamentalist Christian country, it might actually end our conflict with him -- though I can say with some personal assurance that it would create others elsewhere.







Post#502 at 09-22-2001 07:18 PM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
09-22-2001, 07:18 PM #502
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

A few days ago, I have begun to calm down, and have turned against the war. Now, with new info of possible attacks, I think that we need to annihilate these people.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...175951,00.html
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#503 at 09-22-2001 07:44 PM by wmurray,42 [at Seattle joined Sep 2001 #posts 22]
---
09-22-2001, 07:44 PM #503
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Seattle
Posts
22

madscientist - The article has apparently been removed can you elaborate?

Brian
A point more than well made. As leaders of the "secular world" (their perception) we definitely represent the greater threat to them. My comments are driven by my fear of how we might define our own purpose in this conflict and how we will attempt to marshall the support of the rest of the world.

We are all entitled to our own opinions... but we have to share the facts.







Post#504 at 09-22-2001 07:49 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
09-22-2001, 07:49 PM #504
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

On 2001-09-22 17:18, madscientist wrote:
A few days ago, I have begun to calm down, and have turned against the war. Now, with new info of possible attacks, I think that we need to annihilate these people.
Mr. Reed's needs met Mr. Robert Fisk of the Independent (UK) argues in the 23 September 2001 number that those few will be getting what they do not deserve. HTH

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Virgil K. Saari on 2001-09-22 17:50 ]</font>







Post#505 at 09-22-2001 07:58 PM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
09-22-2001, 07:58 PM #505
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

Well, here is the <a href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,175951,00.html
">article</a>:

<font color="blue">
TIME Exclusive: Cropduster Manual Discovered in Suspected Terrorist Hideout
Sources tell TIME that U.S. officials suspect that bin Laden conspirators may have been planning to disperse biological or chemical agents from cropdusting planes BY MASSIMO CALABRESI AND SALLY DONNELLY

Saturday, Sep. 22, 2001
New York -- U.S. law enforcement officials have found a manual on the operation of cropdusting equipment while searching suspected terrorist hideouts, government sources tell TIME magazine in an issue out on Monday, Sept. 24th.

The discovery has added to concerns among government counterterrorism experts that the bin Laden conspirators may have been planning ? or may still be planning ?to disperse biological or chemical agents from a cropdusting plane normally used for agricultural purposes.

Among the belongings of suspected terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui, sources tell TIME, were manuals showing how to operate cropdusting equipment that could be used to spray fast-killing toxins into the air.

The discovery resulted in the grounding of all cropdusters nationwide on Sunday Sept. 16th. The dusters have been allowed back up, but are not allowed to take off or land from what traffic controllers refer to as Class B airspace, or the skies around major cities.

One senior official cautions that because corroborative evidence is lacking the FBI does not place "high credibility" in the notion that the hijackers were in fact exploring the idea of stealing or renting cropdusters. However, the FBI is advising members of a crop-dusters' group to report any suspicious buys of dangerous chemicals in the wake of last week's terrorist attacks.

Last week, the National Agricultural Aviation Association, a crop dusters trade group, posted a message from the FBI to its membership: "Members should be vigilant to any suspicious activity relative to the use, training in or acquisition of dangerous chemicals or airborne application of same including threats, unusual purchases, suspicious behavior by employees or customers, and unusual contacts with the public. Members should report any suspicious circumstances or information to local FBI offices."

?With reporting by Elaine Shannon/Washington </font>
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#506 at 09-22-2001 08:01 PM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
09-22-2001, 08:01 PM #506
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

And Mr. Saari, I know the difference between the terrorists and civilians. We need to annihilate the terrorists, not the civilians.
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#507 at 09-22-2001 08:13 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-22-2001, 08:13 PM #507
Guest

On 2001-09-22 14:55, Lis '54 wrote:
Opusaug, thanks much for posting the archive for Bill's appearance. I'd intended to listen last night and just plain forgot.
You're welcome Lis, but please call me 'Chris'. When the new board asked me for a 'username' I reflexively answered with what I've used elsewhere for over a decade. Though some call me by the nickname "Opus", I really didn't intend to get myself labelled by that here.

Then again, as long as you don't call me "a GenXer" I'll probably answer to anything. :smile:

Chris







Post#508 at 09-22-2001 08:22 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
09-22-2001, 08:22 PM #508
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

On 2001-09-22 18:01, madscientist wrote:
And Mr. Saari, I know the difference between the terrorists and civilians. We need to annihilate the terrorists, not the civilians.
Who'll wager that these guys get a "whiff of grapeshot"? The rich man's war; poor man's fight...seems to apply to this War on Terror as well. Mr. Steven Schwartz follows the money trail to your local gas pump in the Spectator (UK) of 22 September 2001 in the cover story: "Ground Zero and the Saudi Connection". HTH

_________________
Cruelty has a human heart,
And Jealousy a human face;
Terror the human form divine,
And Secrecy the human dress. Songs of Innocence and of Experience:A Divine Image Wm. Blake



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Virgil K. Saari on 2001-09-22 18:26 ]</font>







Post#509 at 09-22-2001 09:44 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-22-2001, 09:44 PM #509
Guest

I had a scary thought. Suppose the 911 attack had occured on 9/11/71 (during the height of the second turning). The response would have been horrible, with radical groups of Americans prominently shown cheering (remember how the Pentagon and the capitalists were reviled by many Boomers then)? Ugh.

Quite a contrast to today, especially from my perspective in the heart of the Blue Zone (I work for the Federal Government's Food and Nutrition Service, which oversees the nutritional assistance to the poor and I belong to a liberal Reform Jewish temple).







Post#510 at 09-22-2001 09:54 PM by Tom Mazanec [at NE Ohio 1958 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,511]
---
09-22-2001, 09:54 PM #510
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
NE Ohio 1958
Posts
1,511

I am still leaning in the direction of "yes" to whether the 911 attack is the catalyst. We are almost certain to get into a military situation in Afganistan that will last months, if not years, and which will have ominous implications for such nations as Pakistan (nuclear weapons) and Saudi Arabia (biggest supplier of petroleum), perhaps even endangering their stability, if we make a misstep here.
Remember, we are barely in November 1929, much less December 1860. People were saying the economy is "fundamentally sound" (sound familiar?) into 1930, and I recall that a major newspaper did not even list Black Tuesday among its Top Ten news events for 1929. And even after Seccession, a lot of people were saying, "let the wayward sisters go." I can match each anecdote about someone crabbing about stopping for an ambulance with one about how people with flags or "I love NY" t-shirts are being saluted by passersby. I am sure many people act 3T well into a 4T (and the same for the other three turnings, of course).







Post#511 at 09-22-2001 11:40 PM by HopefulCynic68 [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 9,412]
---
09-22-2001, 11:40 PM #511
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
9,412

On 2001-09-22 17:16, Brian Rush wrote:
Marc, I don't agree with MMurray, but he/she is no more a kook than you are. Less, I would hope.


I think it's easy to exaggerate the role of religion in this Crisis. That's as much as allowing our enemies in its early phases to define the dimensions and the issues. Those issues will be economic and ecological, at least as much as they are military.


Actually, come to think of it, fundamentalist Christians are not the people for whom bin Laden reserves his true ire. Secularists are -- those who determine society's laws in accordance with the welfare of the people, not the dictates of God, be that God Christian or Muslim. If we did become a fundamentalist Christian country, it might actually end our conflict with him -- though I can say with some personal assurance that it would create others elsewhere.
Bin Laden might respect (sort of) a Fundamentalist Christian version of America, but from his outsider point of view it would make little difference about policy. From the point of view of the Islamic world, (or most non-Western cultures) the RR and the secular worlds of America look a lot more similar than they do to us.

As for ecology, I would submit that there is a distinctly religious tinge to many of the pronouncements of its more extreme adherents as well. 'Religion' can mean far more than just officially recognized faiths.







Post#512 at 09-22-2001 11:42 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-22-2001, 11:42 PM #512
Guest

Former comrade Rush writes, "If we did become a fundamentalist Christian country, it might actually end our conflict with him -- though I can say with some personal assurance that it would create others elsewhere."

Shortly, we will "end our conflict with him." Mr. bin Laden is a "dead man walking."

As to the post-bin Laden anarchy, there are sheep and there are goats. God is the judge hereafter, we are the judge now.

"WE" Get it "we..."

Preamble
WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this CONSTITUTION for the United States of America.


And any kook, commie, terrorist, bin laden et al that so desires to take this document of liberal freedom away from me, my children, or grandchildren will contend with me, and my ilk.

So help me God.








Post#513 at 09-22-2001 11:51 PM by HopefulCynic68 [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 9,412]
---
09-22-2001, 11:51 PM #513
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
9,412

On 2001-09-22 14:59, Jenny Genser wrote:
An interesting article from Michael Kinsley from Slate. For educational purposes only.

Has Everything Changed?
Maybe not.

By Michael Kinsley
Michael Kinsley is editor of Slate. Posted Thursday, Sept. 20, 2001, at 4:00 p.m. PT



Years ago, as a tourist in Vienna, I met an old lady who called herself "the Prinzessin" and claimed to be a Hapsburg princess, now reduced to the status of tour guide. Among her collection of overpolished anecdotes was an item about complaining to her mother one day during her childhood that life was boring. "The next day," she said, "we heard that Archduke Franz Ferdinand had been shot." Pause for effect. "And life was never boring anymore."

The notion that there are days when history swings on a pivot is irresistible and, to some extent, valid. The shooting of the archduke that started World War I ? the bombing of Pearl Harbor ? the Kennedy assassination ? Before: innocence and sun-dappled lawns. Afterward: knowledge, modernity, and darkness. Will Sept. 11, 2001, really turn out to have been one of those days? A horrible day, certainly, and?yes?a day that will live in infamy. But a day when life changed dramatically and permanently for everyone, at least in America? Maybe so, but there are adequate reasons to doubt, and excellent reasons to avoid leaping to that conclusion if it can be avoided.

For the journalists and politicians we depend on for the official clich?s of our national conversation, the apocalyptic note is irresistible. No crude theorizing about ratings or votes is required. It's just the nature of journalism to make "this is more important than you think" a subtext of every story. And when you've devalued concepts like "crisis" and "war," as TV news especially has done in recent years, apocalypse is about all you have left when a story this big comes along. As for pols, they are also natural hyperbolizers who are not disposed to conclude that a national crisis is smaller than it seems.

Although logic doesn't really matter in such things, there is a logical contradiction among the official clich?s of the moment that "everything has changed" and "this means war." Victory in the war against terrorism consists precisely of everything not changing. If life has changed permanently and dramatically for the worse, terrorism has won the war. In fact, if people become convinced that?say?getting on an airplane is wildly riskier than they previously thought, terrorism has won whether that is objectively true or not.

"Everything has changed" can also become a self-fulfilling prophecy in terms of the economy, where consumer confidence matters a lot more than the direct costs of terrorism itself. Being told again and again that life from now on will be unrecognizable doesn't exactly make me want to rush out to Wal-Mart.

Certainly it's ironic that so many Americans seem convinced that life was wonderful until last week and will be terrible from now on. For over a decade until last week, the mantra of American politics was "change." Voters demanded it, politicians of all stripes promised it. Life was, in some unspecified way that "the system" was responsible for, unbearable. Now "everything has changed," and we don't like it one bit. We long for the lost world of Sept. 10. For thousands of Americans directly affected by the attack, life has indeed changed tragically. But for most of us it's at worst too early to say whether everyday life will be permanently and dramatically altered. And there's something self-indulgent about assuming so, just as there was something self-indulgent about the hunger for "change" in what we now regard as the pre-Sept. 11 Eden.

While flag-waving is an appropriate and moving response to a frontal attack on our country?and perhaps patriotism cannot be fine-tuned?there are a couple of wrong notes in the current national chorus. One of course is bullying, which is always the underside of patriotism. More novel, disturbing?and, I'm afraid, more characteristic of America today?is the theme of victimization. Oh, poor us. We need grief counseling, candlelight vigils, little ribbons to wear. Those ribbons claim membership and ask for sympathy more than they communicate resolve. We share the pain of actual victims not just through empathy and financial generosity (though there's been plenty of that) but also by feeling victimized ourselves. How long before some doctor discovers a "Sept. 11 syndrome" and some lawyer tries to sue Osama Bin Laden over it?

In the case of a president who must suddenly rally people to an unexpected cause, a bit of hyperbole is understandable. The danger for Bush is that he is promising total victory when that is not really possible or even, in a way, necessary. Terrorism is not "an enemy" that can be defeated. It is an infinite variety of tactics available to any enemy. Particular enemies can be defeated and terrorism in general can be discouraged, but the possibility can never be eliminated.

Spreading alarm about terrorism has been an industry for at least two decades. Read last January's "Report of the National Commission on Terrorism: Countering the Changing Threat of International Terrorism." Or, if you prefer, last December's "Toward a National Strategy for Combating Terrorism," the report of a completely different government commission. Both are full of scenarios, none of them resembling what happened Sept. 11, and recommendations, none of which would have prevented it.

Life was riskier than we realized before Sept. 11 and is not as risky as we fear now. Resisting the conclusion that everything has changed is one way to help prevent it from being true.

I don't often agree with Michael Kinsley (though he is far more thoughtful than many of the left-wing writers), but here is has hit on some basic truths.

Declaring war on an abstract concept is not really meaningful. I'm not in fact sure that Bush has done this. I suspect a lot of what comes out of the Federal Government now is intended more for opposition ears than our own. That's characteristic of war and war-like situations.

As for the change being less absolute than it seems, certainly. I suspect that some in Israel and Palestine and Beirut and Ireland and Tibet are watching and wondering where we've been all this time, that we're so shocked.

Until a couple of days ago, I was starting to wonder if there was something wrong with me that I wasn't shocked. Surprised by the scale and exact timing, yes, but not shocked.
It's not as if terrorism is something nobody ever experienced before, and even before I read Strauss and Howe I always had the right-wing visceral view that no peace is forever.

For the last couple of days, though, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's not all that shocked.

Not that I am in any way denigrating the grief of the survivors or the horror of the event!








Post#514 at 09-23-2001 12:11 AM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
09-23-2001, 12:11 AM #514
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

On 2001-09-22 19:44, Jenny Genser wrote:
I had a scary thought. Suppose the 911 attack had occured on 9/11/71 (during the height of the second turning). The response would have been horrible, with radical groups of Americans prominently shown cheering (remember how the Pentagon and the capitalists were reviled by many Boomers then)? Ugh.
The nation would've probably erupted in a series of riots. The zealots would blame the government for the acts of violence. The loss of confidence would've been tremendous. What else can people imagine (especially if you lived during that period)?
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#515 at 09-23-2001 01:22 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-23-2001, 01:22 AM #515
Guest

Since we keep addressing religion, I have a quote and a web document that may have interest.

First the quote:

Science is a religion based on experimentation, not doctrine. All other established churches have been based on somebody having found the truth. This is the first church based on not having found it.

From "Eugenics and Other Evils", 'An Argument Against the Scientifically Organized Society' by G.K. Chesterton, in 1922.

The Web Page on Islam.
http://argument.independent.co.uk/co...sp?story=95578







Post#516 at 09-23-2001 06:40 AM by Rain Man [at Bendigo, Australia joined Jun 2001 #posts 1,303]
---
09-23-2001, 06:40 AM #516
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Bendigo, Australia
Posts
1,303

On 2001-09-22 22:11, madscientist wrote:
On 2001-09-22 19:44, Jenny Genser wrote:
I had a scary thought. Suppose the 911 attack had occured on 9/11/71 (during the height of the second turning). The response would have been horrible, with radical groups of Americans prominently shown cheering (remember how the Pentagon and the capitalists were reviled by many Boomers then)? Ugh.
The nation would've probably erupted in a series of riots. The zealots would blame the government for the acts of violence. The loss of confidence would've been tremendous. What else can people imagine (especially if you lived during that period)?
The whole thing would been unimagable to say the least, you have lots of Boomers cheering in the streets and doing their own counter terrorism. Plus lots other Boomers getting exteremly angry because of attacks, attacking Muslims, Arabs, Burning Mosques, Buisnesses, Homes and Arab Churches. There would be tons of pro-war protests saying "nuke the bastards now!", plus plenty of anti-war protests. Lots of conserative Boomers would sign up for the army in one moments notice and fight those bastards and lots of other Boomers will oppose the war with all the strength they could. Not a pretty picture :<
"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion"

L. Ron Hubbard







Post#517 at 09-23-2001 06:40 AM by Rain Man [at Bendigo, Australia joined Jun 2001 #posts 1,303]
---
09-23-2001, 06:40 AM #517
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Bendigo, Australia
Posts
1,303

On 2001-09-22 22:11, madscientist wrote:
On 2001-09-22 19:44, Jenny Genser wrote:
I had a scary thought. Suppose the 911 attack had occured on 9/11/71 (during the height of the second turning). The response would have been horrible, with radical groups of Americans prominently shown cheering (remember how the Pentagon and the capitalists were reviled by many Boomers then)? Ugh.
The nation would've probably erupted in a series of riots. The zealots would blame the government for the acts of violence. The loss of confidence would've been tremendous. What else can people imagine (especially if you lived during that period)?
The whole thing would been unimagable to say the least, you have lots of Boomers cheering in the streets and doing their own counter terrorism. Plus lots other Boomers getting exteremly angry because of attacks, attacking Muslims, Arabs, Burning Mosques, Buisnesses, Homes and Arab Churches. There would be tons of pro-war protests saying "nuke the bastards now!", plus plenty of anti-war protests. Lots of conserative Boomers would sign up for the army in one moments notice and fight those bastards and lots of other Boomers will oppose the war with all the strength they could. Not a pretty picture :sad:
"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion"

L. Ron Hubbard







Post#518 at 09-23-2001 07:11 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-23-2001, 07:11 AM #518
Guest

I dont know...that special with Celine Dion singing God Bless America seemed awfully Third Turning to me.







Post#519 at 09-23-2001 07:32 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-23-2001, 07:32 AM #519
Guest

Awhile back Richt wrote the following

>>Our current seemingly all-out response is coming without sufficient societal preparation time. Are we close enough to generational alignment to bite the bullet and handle things, or still too far away, turning this into a less-than-total response, no matter what the current words being uttered?

If we do indeed make this an all-out response, turning a catalyst into a crisis right away, then we are really jumping the gun, and instead of our "2004-5" response coming in 2001, we will have our cataclysmic 2020 event coming before 2010 or even 2005 perhaps, which does not bode well for us.>>


Richt I agree.
I think that the generational stew is just about done, but not quite ready. There are strong signs of GenXers entering midlife.
The Beastie Boys (who I see as kind of our generations Beatles) have kind of hung up the mic, and have taken completely to taking stands on issues and running their record company Grand Royal (which coincidentally went out of business the day of the attacks)
Most Xers have quieted down, and its become more difficult(as late wave Xers friends of mine have discussed) to have a completely outrageous party on par with my brothers parties in the 80s where there were actually footprints on the ceiling leftover from when someone played "dancing on the ceiling"
Society just isnt as tolerant of wild youth, and I think the gen Xers into midlife is just about to begin (I am 22 which is pretty scary, but if youre a 13er, then youve kind of been on the wild youth ride since you could go outside)
I am one of the few that think that our national mood has changed dramatically, but not completely over the hump into the Fourth Turning. It will take one more push.
A catalyst.









Post#520 at 09-23-2001 09:52 AM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
09-23-2001, 09:52 AM #520
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Is this a straw in the winds of change?

Rep. Gary Condit (Dem.-CA) has been named to the <s>Committee of Public Safety</s> {er, Homeland Security Committee}. I know I'll sleep much better knowing this. HTH

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Virgil K. Saari on 2001-09-23 07:58 ]</font>







Post#521 at 09-23-2001 10:42 AM by David Krein [at Gainesville, Florida joined Jul 2001 #posts 604]
---
09-23-2001, 10:42 AM #521
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Gainesville, Florida
Posts
604

Mr. Saari - thanks for the tip on Condit's new career. Who do you think he is most like? Surely not Robespierre, or Saint-Just, or Carnot. Maybe Georges Couthon, the womanizer, or Jeanbon Saint-Andre, the Huguenot cleric?

Pax,

Dave Krein '42

"The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on; nor all your Piety nor Wit shall lure it back to cancel half a line, Nor all your Tears wash out a word of it." - Omar Khayyam.







Post#522 at 09-23-2001 11:01 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
09-23-2001, 11:01 AM #522
Guest

The Washington Post details terrorist activity in U.S.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2001Sep22.html


Quote:
"They are so good at compartmentalizing," an official said yesterday, noting and anguishing over the difficulty of finding clear links among the cells. The officials declined to identify the cities where the al Qaeda groups are located."


Comment:
I seem to remember a certain past president whose ability to "compartmentalize" seem marvelous in the eyes of many at the Washington Post and the media in general.





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2001-09-23 10:56 ]</font>







Post#523 at 09-23-2001 11:29 AM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
09-23-2001, 11:29 AM #523
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

HopefulCynic said:
From the point of view of the Islamic world, (or most non-Western cultures) the RR and the secular worlds of America look a lot more similar than they do to us.

We continue to disagree about the nature and influence of evangelical Christianity in this culture, H.C.


I don't know about "the Islamic world." But if we're talking about Muslim fundamentalists, your statement is demonstrably incorrect. I have seen many quotes in the papers recently from Muslim terrorists and their supporters to the effect that America's biggest crime in the eyes of God was turning away from Christianity and imposing a secular society. Islam has always recognized its kinship with Christianity and considered Jesus a prophet of God, although Muslims believe they hold an updated version of the truth. For the fundamentalist Muslims to accordingly recognize their kinship with fundamentalist Christians is only logical, and is supported by statements like this, in today's San Francisco Chronicle:


Mahmoud Aboulihama [convicted of the failed WTC bombing] . . . told [Mark] Juergensmeyer [in an interview] it took him a long time "to understand what the hell is going on in the United States and in Europe about secularism of people, you know, who have no religion.


"I lived their life, but they didn't live my life, so they will never understand the way I live or the way I think." . . .


Before this month's attack on the World Trade Center, Aboulihama was asked in a jailhouse interview if he thought the United States would be better off with a Christian government.


"Yes," the convicted terrorist replied. "At least it would have morals."

Fallwell's statement about God having removed his protection from America because of secularism also received positive commentary from Muslim fundamentalists, I believe from Iraq.


It is an interesting question what would have happened in 1971. My guess is that the country would have united against the threat more than many of you suppose. The antiwar movement would have gotten much quieter. It would have been much harder to protest against the U.S. military or the government when the country was really, obviously in danger.


In fact, I speculated once on another thread regarding what would happen if external events forced a Crisis era with a wildly inappropriate generational constellation. What I think would happen is that each generation, while remaining true to its own archetype at the core, would adopt the life role of its phase of life location to the best of its ability. It would make for a clumsy Crisis, though, to be sure. Let's be thankful nothing of the sort occurred.







Post#524 at 09-23-2001 12:25 PM by Tim Walker '56 [at joined Jun 2001 #posts 24]
---
09-23-2001, 12:25 PM #524
Join Date
Jun 2001
Posts
24

Brian Rush quoted an interview of a jailed terrorist. I recall another post that the Japanese used 1920s Unraveling behavior to show American decadence. I imagine that there are cultural misunderstandings due to the very different civilizations of the terrorists and their victims, compounded by Unraveling behavior. I doubt that those people understand us or really have any idea where we are coming from. Therefore we must be decadent.







Post#525 at 09-23-2001 12:43 PM by Brian Rush [at California joined Jul 2001 #posts 12,392]
---
09-23-2001, 12:43 PM #525
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
California
Posts
12,392

Tim, I wasn't arguing that we really are decadent. I don't agree with the viewpoint of fundamentalists Christian or Muslim. Not in the least.


I was simply pointing out the congruence of those viewpoints, and how the main thing the bin Laden crowd have against our society involves a moral and religious critique based on the fact that we are a secular, non-puritanical society with a complex rather than simplistic mythos.


If you want to understand why these people hate us, you need look no further than our own homegrown religious right, and why they, too, criticize our society. The only significant difference between the two groups lies in the methods each is willing to employ.
-----------------------------------------