From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Feb 3 17:47:15 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8F037B401 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:47:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from globalhead.caustic.org (ip-66-80-5-169.dsl.sca.megapath.net [66.80.5.169]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C56C343F3F for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:47:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jan@caustic.org) Received: from pogo.caustic.org (caustic.org [64.163.147.186]) by globalhead.caustic.org (8.12.7/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h141l6ae031363; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:47:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from pogo.caustic.org (localhost.caustic.org [IPv6:::1]) by pogo.caustic.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h141l59U020577; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:47:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jan@caustic.org) Received: from localhost (jan@localhost) by pogo.caustic.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with ESMTP id h141l4qY020574; Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:47:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jan@caustic.org) X-Authentication-Warning: pogo.caustic.org: jan owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 17:47:04 -0800 (PST) From: "f.johan.beisser" To: Terry Lambert Cc: Brad Knowles , JacobRhoden , Subject: Re: oh my god the nasa shuttle blewup In-Reply-To: <3E3F1184.5C0A56AB@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20030203173729.U63914-100000@pogo.caustic.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Terry Lambert wrote: > I find that extremely unlikely, actually, or the bad guys would already > have won, since there are a lot of minimal effort things that you could > do to disrupt the U.S. economy, if that was your target. The WTC crash > was a big deal politically and in terms of human interest, but it didn't > significantly disrupt any of the underlying systems, to any real degree. agreed.. except.. > It was an incredibly ineffective act. no, it was remarkably effective. if you're not going for the underlying systems (a difficult target to hurt in any real meaningful way), you end up going for media coverage. terrorism is effective because it creates FUD, and the WTC attacks were just that. if you want to create FUD in an entire country, you have to create something unbelievable. it's not dropping bombs on people, it's creating something so mediagenic that it can't be ignored. it has to look good on camera. i'm fairly convinced the timing of the impacts was intentional, designed to get live media coverage over as much of the world as possible. in that regard, it worked very, very well. -------/ f. johan beisser /--------------------------------------+ http://caustic.org/~jan jan@caustic.org "Champagne for my real friends, real pain for my sham friends." -- Tom Waits To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message