Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Seaver · 09-21-2007, 03:04 PM

In my opinion that is a Luxury, well manufactured, state of the art train that gets derailed by staring so closely at the track you missed the pile of rocks you're heading into.

The logical steps one uses to draw the conclusion requires two pivotal steps which crosses cross-cultural moral boundaries in order to either A) conclude a moral-less situation where no one is wrong, or B) all are wrong so it does not matter.

To conclude that the US economic domination caused the WTC to be legitimate targets requires on ethical grounds a number of situations which are blatantly false. Either the WTC is simply a symbol, or those people in the WTC were soldiers in an economic war where the side that was defeated lost real lives. The WTC is absolutely a symbol of globalization, in fact one could say it was THE symbol. However the destruction was not like the pulling of the Wall of Berlin, nor the pulling of the Stalin statue, which were powerful symbols in their time. Instead it more closely parallels the pyramid of skulls after the Mongol sacking of the Persian capital. History tells us the Persian Emperor killed a messenger, which wrought the destruction upon them. The immense wealth the Persians was due to withholding economic access of it's neighbors to the silk road and gold mines it sat on. Would you then consider the population of the Capital legitimate targets? According to Ward's logic train it's perfectly acceptable, because the economic power the country held assured anyone within said nation is an "Eichman."

Ward Churchill decided those in the WTC were not just warriors, they were the "Eichmen" of the 3rd Reich. That is where all the attention is drawn, but the logic train took the broken path back when they decided that businessmen are legitimate military targets. As said, one can only conclude those things only after cross-cultural morals have been broken. If you want to live in a moral-free world, where no judgment is passed on anyone due to legitimizing the retaliation in a bubble, that's fine. However I don't believe there is a single person here who wishes to live in such an anarchistic and lawless society. Therefore we must hold moral accountability to actions, and weight actions and intents accordingly.

09-21-2007, 03:04 PM	#28 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	In my opinion that is a Luxury, well manufactured, state of the art train that gets derailed by staring so closely at the track you missed the pile of rocks you're heading into. The logical steps one uses to draw the conclusion requires two pivotal steps which crosses cross-cultural moral boundaries in order to either A) conclude a moral-less situation where no one is wrong, or B) all are wrong so it does not matter. To conclude that the US economic domination caused the WTC to be legitimate targets requires on ethical grounds a number of situations which are blatantly false. Either the WTC is simply a symbol, or those people in the WTC were soldiers in an economic war where the side that was defeated lost real lives. The WTC is absolutely a symbol of globalization, in fact one could say it was THE symbol. However the destruction was not like the pulling of the Wall of Berlin, nor the pulling of the Stalin statue, which were powerful symbols in their time. Instead it more closely parallels the pyramid of skulls after the Mongol sacking of the Persian capital. History tells us the Persian Emperor killed a messenger, which wrought the destruction upon them. The immense wealth the Persians was due to withholding economic access of it's neighbors to the silk road and gold mines it sat on. Would you then consider the population of the Capital legitimate targets? According to Ward's logic train it's perfectly acceptable, because the economic power the country held assured anyone within said nation is an "Eichman." Ward Churchill decided those in the WTC were not just warriors, they were the "Eichmen" of the 3rd Reich. That is where all the attention is drawn, but the logic train took the broken path back when they decided that businessmen are legitimate military targets. As said, one can only conclude those things only after cross-cultural morals have been broken. If you want to live in a moral-free world, where no judgment is passed on anyone due to legitimizing the retaliation in a bubble, that's fine. However I don't believe there is a single person here who wishes to live in such an anarchistic and lawless society. Therefore we must hold moral accountability to actions, and weight actions and intents accordingly. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas Last edited by Seaver; 09-21-2007 at 03:09 PM..