Quote from canyonman00:
Let me see if I've got this straight. If a gang member kicks down your door, shoots the wife and kids, then burns the place down, it's ok because:
a) the african-american plight was caused by the abduction of our ancestors,
b) the poor educational system in our communities has not given us a fair chance,
c) we were forced to accept Christianity instead of our own mythical beliefs,
d) our belief that the police always are trying to terrorize and deprive us of our civil rights,
e) we are not compensated equitably in the workplace,
f) we lost all connections and rights to our homeland, and,
g) it's only fair because you deserve it and you know you do.
Now the logic goes, he is not a criminal committing a crime but rather a brave protestor because he knows when he did those things that he would most likely be punished. Subsequently, all African Americans should reserve a place at the table of honor because it is stabbing you in the heart and making you address your ancestors injustice? Tell me that I am getting this correct. You see that might explain and help me understand some of the more hard core rap music and the messages that I don't fathom at the moment.
You clearly are more in touch with them, using that logic, than I. Using your premise, this whole measure of intollerance of crime in this country needs to be reviewed. You see I'm sure that you won't give the folks overseas more tollerance and understanding than you would give our own citizens.
canyonman00,
I never said anything about whether the terrorists were right or wrong. I simply said they were brave. Period.
If one agrees that the definition of bravery is feeling fear yet going forward anyway, then if the terrorists felt fear and went forward with flying the planes anyway they were, therefore, brave.
Let's stop beating around the bush...These terrorists, no matter how wrong they were, had some serious balls and were BRAVE.
That was the entire point of my original post, to point out the absurdity of those who are so paranoid that they won't even allow such a statement. Again, if you acknowledge my definition of bravery, and also acknowledge the terrorists were capable of feeling fear, then by definition they had to be brave. All Bill Mahr did was point this out, and he was punished for it.
The reason Bill mahr even mentioned that they were brave was because at the time everyone and their mom was going on tv and calling the terrorists cowards, which completely misses the boat.
Underestimating our enemy only hurts us. The fact is the terrorists were very brave and did whatever it took to accomplish their goals. If we are to effectively fight terrorism we should stop the inaccurate name calling (coward etc.), and instead acknowledge that these are some brave, dedicated people we are dealing with.
I think the problem is that in America "bravery" has the positive connotation of being a compliment instead of just a word. This creates some serious cognitive dissonance when Americans see deplorable people doing brave things. They cannot mentally accept that they were brave, and have to rationalize that their actions were somehow cowardly.
As far as your comments on the gang member kicking down my door and shooting everyone, then not being responsible because of society etc....
Again, my comments on bravery weren't meant to imply morality. Yes, the gang member is certainly immoral for doing what he did. But was that gang member brave? If he was sane, realized there was a good possibility that he would go to jail or be put to death for his actions, and felt fear, yet shot everyone anyway, then yes, he was brave. If you don't agree, then your problem is with my definition of bravery, not my assessment of the hypothetical gangster as brave.