Plane crashes into Tampa office tower

I'd need to see some pretty convincing evidence before believing that the medicine was responsible for suicides. Before one can determine the effect of X on Y, one must observe Y in the absence of X. That means that we need to know exactly how that person would have reacted without taking that medicine. There are too many variables - how the kid is treated at school, how he is treated at home, if he feels alone, if he thinks he'll ever be able to find happiness, etc. These things may or may not be influenced by the acne and its medication. It's too early to blame it on the medicine though, I think. Studies have shown that kids on that medication have a higher suicide rate - ooookay, but do they show that kids who would normally be prescribed that medication but were not, or kids that were prescribed the medication but fail to take it, have a "normal" suicide rate? What if his acne lead to poor reception from females, thus leading to his depression? Could this not be the case with a number of the suicides? Maybe with all of them? How can we be certain? I don't think that we can without a whole hell of a lot more time invested in the research of the drug and its effects. Remember - Y in the absence of X = ? Y + X = ? Those are questions that need to be answered.

[ladysycamore]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by ladysycamore
Oh, but he was a member of the armed services: he couldn't possibly be a threat to national security. He was just..."troubled". How about we just single out that Arab or Sikh Indian instead? It's MUCH easier, donchaknow.

Originally posted by dhamsaic

NO.
He was <b>REPEATEDLY</b> called a terrorist.

Not as much at the time of the crime, but more recently. He certainly wasn't treated like the terroists that are now housed in Cuba.

You're twisting facts here to add to your argument - that's called "spin", and that's okay.

Mmm...no. I was merely making a slight joke with my McVeigh reference, which you did not pick up on...and that's ok too.

[ladysycamore]

Originally posted by MaggieL


I think we're quite likely to see the letter eventually...sooner if it's in the hands of the NTSB, later if the Tampa cops have it, where somebody may try to seal the record because Bishop was a juvenile.

Most likely. Time will tell.

It would appear that one thing Bishop was quite "troubled" about was *being* a "dirty Arab". His dad's birth name was evidently "BIshara", and converations he had with a teacher after 9/11 suggest he was feeling terrible conflict about his Dad's ethnicity.

Interesting. Wonder if the media, etc. will play upon that information (about him being Arab).

[ladysycamore]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
Fortunately, the Klan has toned down their, uh, "message".

Perhaps, but IMO, the "threat" is still there, based on their history. I'm not putting anything past them.

I think they're all worthless pieces of shit - of that, there is no doubt. However, if they're not really "terrifying" anymore, I don't know if we can consider them "terrorists".

Mmm...maybe they don't terrify YOU, but if I were walking down the street, and I saw some dude with a hood on, I'd be running the other way like my life depended on it...Hell, it WOULD! Again: the potential is a greater threat to me that anything that they are trying to convince people of believeing: "Oh, we aren't like the Klan of the past." The hell you aren't. You STILL hate blacks, jews, catholics, gays, and God knows WHO else.

And who's to say that they won't summon up yet another revival at Stone Mountain, GA, like they've done during their history, to regroup, and "try" to revive some of the past? Sure, they may fail, but just the fact that they are ABLE to do so worries me more.

*from the history channel website*


KU KLUX KLAN

There have been three Ku Klux Klan movements, which, despite a
clear line of descent and strong family resemblances, were separate
from one another in time, organization, and purpose.

The first Klan flourished during the Reconstruction era and was all but
exclusively southern in its membership and concerns. Its objective was
to perpetuate white supremacy following emancipation and the
conferral of civil and political rights on blacks. It was founded at
Pulaski, Tennessee, in 1866 as a social fraternity, but rapidly became a
local regulator or vigilante organization similar to others at the time.
Perhaps intrigued by its secrecy, disguises, and unique name (derived
from a Greek word for "circle" or "band"), former Confederates
including Gen. Nathan Bedford Forrest converted the Klan in 1867
into a paramilitary force to oppose the Republican state government
under William G. Brownlow. The order quickly spread across the
South in the spring of 1868 as other Republican state governments
came into being under the Congressional Reconstruction acts. A similar
group in southern Louisiana called itself the Knights of the White
Camellia.

Klansmen were drawn from every walk of life, but the leaders often
were from the landholding and professional elite. After a brief flurry of
practical joking and pretending to be ghosts, the Klan emerged as a
terrorist group dedicated to defeating the Republican party and
keeping blacks in "their place" socially and economically.

Most southern counties saw little of the Klan, but others were overrun
by it for months or years at a time. It tended to thrive where the two
parties or races were relatively evenly balanced; in such places,
terrorism was most apt to change election results. In the worst-affected
counties, disguised night riders ranged the countryside on a regular
basis, dragging people from their homes, whipping, shooting, or
otherwise assaulting them, destroying their property, or driving them
away. Most of the victims were black, but white Republicans were
also targets.

The Reconstruction Klan was largely rural; its victims fled to the towns
for safety. It was also predominantly local, differing from place to place
and with little or no central control. Members went their own way and
few dared stop them. Most southern whites sympathized with the
Klan's objectives if not its methods, and those who liked neither were
often intimidated by it. As a result, few southerners opposed it, and the
Klan often paralyzed the law enforcement process.

In a few states, such as Arkansas and North Carolina, white
Republicans organized militia units and broke up the Klan. In most
states, however, federal intervention was required, in the form of
congressional legislation, military arrests, and trials in federal courts. By
these means the Klan was virtually destroyed in 1871-1872.

Around the turn of the century the Klan, and the Confederate "lost
cause" generally, took on a retrospective romantic appeal for
southerners that had been lacking amid the suffering immediately after
the conflict. This appeal was greatly stimulated by Thomas Dixon's
1905 novel, The Clansman, and D. W. Griffith's 1915 motion picture
based on it, Birth of a Nation. The second Klan was born in that
environment in 1915, which encouraged the superpatriotism of World
War I. After the war its membership and geographic range expanded
dramatically.

During its heyday in the early 1920s this Klan numbered over 3 million
members nationwide, and it won political power in Indiana, Oklahoma,
Oregon, and a number of other states. Unlike its predecessor it was
mainly an urban phenomenon, reflecting the demographic changes in
the nation. It drew members and leaders from all ranks of white
society, but chiefly from lower-middle-class people, largely religious
fundamentalists who felt threatened by a national drift away from the
small-town Protestant culture they had grown up with.

The 1920s Klan fed on a variety of frustrations and fears: fear of the
immigrants who were entering the country in large numbers, of
communists and other radicals spawned by the Russian Revolution, of
blacks who were moving into northern cities in increasing numbers, of
Jews and Catholics who were rising in the economic and social order,
and of labor unions demanding a larger share of the pie for their
members.

Some of these Klansmen resorted to violence as in the days of old.
But, in a membership exceeding 3 million, the vast majority were
nonviolent. They marched in parades, paid dues, and bought regalia
(this Klan was, for some of its organizers, a financial bonanza). They
voted for Klan-endorsed political candidates and attended rallies
where crosses were burned. (The original Klan did not burn crosses;
the idea seems to have originated in Dixon's novels.) The organization
dwindled away in the late 1920s, the result of its own legal, financial,
and political excesses, though a remnant persisted until its final
disbandment in 1944.

Only two years later the third Klan emerged. It was fueled by the fear
of communism abroad and at home, but the civil rights movement
provided its major stimulus. Organized in many parts of the country, it
is primarily southern- and urban-based. Membership is still drawn
disproportionately from undereducated people with relatively low
social and economic status. The peak in membership came during the
civil rights demonstrations of the 1960s, when it approached seventeen
thousand.

The modern Klan is small, chronically fragmented, and prone to
internal conflict over matters of policy and personal rivalry. Groups
differ in their readiness to embrace violence. Some have accumulated
substantial arsenals and have even manufactured and sold weapons to
raise funds. They have sometimes forged alliances with like-minded
organizations, as happened in 1979 when North Carolina Klansmen
briefly formed a United Racist front with the state's tiny Nazi party.
Klansmen have also had ties to such white supremacist organizations
as the National States' Rights party, the Aryan Nations, and the
Skinheads.

For all their power to make newspaper headlines, the three Klans
historically failed to accomplish their major objectives. The first did not
end southern Reconstruction in the 1870s; that was more nearly the
work of organized rioters and Red Shirt campaigners. The second did
not significantly deflect the nation's progress toward a pluralistic,
democratic society in the 1920s. And the major effect of the third on
the civil rights movement was to hasten the triumph of that cause when
the Klan's violence helped mobilize public support for passage of
landmark civil rights legislation in the 1960s.

David Chalmers, Hooded Americanism: The History of
the Ku Klux Klan, 3d ed. (1987); Allen W. Trelease,
White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and
Southern Reconstruction (1971); Wyn Craig Wade, The
Fiery Cross: The Ku Klux Klan in America (1987).

Allen W. Trelease

Originally posted by ladysycamore
Sure, they may fail, but just the fact that they are ABLE to do so worries me more.

Yep, those freedoms we've got really bother me...

P.S. - please provide links to relevant articles in the future instead of posting the entire text.

[ladysycamore]

Originally posted by Whit
Next subject, the KKK has not exactly toned down. What they've done is grown smarter. They still work hard at recruitment, but they recognise their message is unpopular right now. So, instead of being the big bad nasty death squad of the past they pretend to be civic minded activists.

BINGO!

What's worse is they don't think it's an act. They've been taught to speak more intelligently, so their message sounds more reasonable. They've helped set-up more (by the current standards) extreme white supremisist groups. Who then condem them for not being tough enough. Again making them sound less insane. This scare's me. I want my lunatics acting insane, they're easier to spot that way.

You know, it's funny you should state that last comment: Many blacks who "came up" during the Civil Rights movement have stated that it was "easier" to deal/fight/handle those who were "in your face" than the undercover, underlying racism that is "the norm" now. This is why it's harder nowadays to file suits against employers regarding discrimination, etc.

This has been going on for awhile now. I remember about a decade ago when they set up shop in north west Arkansas a black guy I worked with said they had asked all the african-americans in the area to a big picnic to show how much they had changed. (He didn't go) The fact that he wouldn't back down doesn't mean that he wasn't scared.

I don't blame him for not going. I wouldn't have gone either. They MUST have been out of their minds!

As far as the kid goes, my original opinion is largely unchanged. The big difference is that I don't think he should get a Darwin award, he offed himself on purpose, suicides are automaticaly excluded. Heck, I'd love to hear some jokes on this. Of the "What's the last thing that goes through a bugs mind when he hit's a windshield going 60 mph?" variety. He wanted to kill. In my book you lose all consideration given to a victim when that person person seeks to victimize others. I actually chuckled when I found out he was seeking to do real damage and instead wound up doing almost nothing. He was confused? Tough shit. I know people who have been through much worse and they never killed anyone over it. I have no sympthy for him.

I heard that!!!

[ladysycamore]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
P.S. - please provide links to relevant articles in the future instead of posting the entire text.

I tried to right click the site, but since the text was in a funky frame of sorts, no link was obtained.

I hate that shit. When sites do that. More than that though, I hate that javascript that disables the right click. Man does that piss me off.

[ladysycamore]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
I hate that shit. When sites do that. More than that though, I hate that javascript that disables the right click. Man does that piss me off.

I KNOW! I hate that when I'm trying to steal a photo from a website and...whoops. Told on meself...LOL!

It just pisses me off 'cause I <b>always</b> right-click -> "Back" to go back when I'm done reading a page. That annoying fucking popup they do to steal the focus just pisses me off. I always make it a point to never go to that site again.

[Nic Name]

15-year-old suicide pilot acted alone, police say

Reuters News Agency

Tampa, Fla. — A 15-year-old student pilot who crashed a plane into a Tampa office building last month was not a terrorist, despite a note he left praising Osama bin Laden and supporting the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States, Tampa police said Wednesday.

Ending their investigation into an incident that some saw as a grim echo of the airliner assaults on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Tampa, Fla. police said Charles Bishop acted alone when he intentionally flew a stolen, single-engine Cessna into the Bank of America building in Tampa.

Mr. Bishop died on Jan. 5 after he took the plane from a St. Petersburg, Fla. airport where he had been taking flying lessons, flew through restricted airspace at MacDill Air Force Base and crashed into the 28th floor of the 42-story tower. No one else was injured.

"Based on information obtained during this exhaustive investigation, there is no indication the plane crash was in any way an act of terrorism. Authorities further concluded the incident appears to have been an intentional act on the part of the pilot, Charles Bishop," the Tampa Police Department said in a statement.

The joint investigation was conducted by the Tampa police, the FBI and other federal, local and state agencies.

For the first time, investigators released the full text of the two-page handwritten letter found in the wreckage of the plane. Police had summarized the letter in the days after the crash, saying it expressed support for bin Laden, the Islamic militant believed responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks, which killed some 3,000 people.

Mr. Bishop wrote, "I have prepared this statement in regards to the terrorist acts I am about to commit." The word terrorist was then crossed out.

"First of all, Osama bin Laden is absolutely justified in the terror he has caused on 9-11," the note continued. "He has brought a mighty nation to its knees! God blesses him and the others who helped make September 11 happen.

"The U.S. will have to face the consequences for its horrific actions against the Palestinian people and Iraqis by its allegiance with the monstrous Israelis who want nothing short of world domination.

"You will pay — God help you — and I will (underlined) make you pay.

"There will be more coming! Al Qaeda and other organizations have met with me several times to discuss the option of me joining. I didn't.

"This is an operation done by me only. I had no other help, although I am acting on their behalf.

"Osama bin Laden is planning on blowing up the Super Bowl with an antiquated nuclear bomb left over from the 1967 Israeli-Syrian war," the unsigned note concluded.

There were no incidents at last Sunday's Super Bowl game in New Orleans, which was played under heavy security.

Mr. Bishop's mother released a statement shortly after the crash calling her son a boy who loved his country. Students and teachers who knew him said he never said anything in support of bid Laden or the Sept. 11 attacks.

This guy can't get labelled a terrorist with this note and an intentional plane crash into the Bank of America tower.

Thank god that wasn't another terrorist attack. whew. I can relax now. Just a prank, after all.

I see now why they had to embargo the letter until after the Super Bowl. Because it contained a terrorist threat.

[jeni]

it's funny how often parents are so clueless about their kids.

yeah, he loved his country. right.

This whole fiasco could have gone over much better if he would have just come up to VA and said "beat me to death, I'm planning on flying a plane into a building." I would have met his request, and there would be no ruined plane or a hole in a building.

I think they probably deemed him a non-terrorist because it's quite obvious that he is <b>off his rocker</b>. What a little tool.

Anyway. I think he was a terrorist. Fuck the FL police.

[Undertoad]

Hey, they said Al Queda was trying to recruit non-Arabic people, maybe the kid was the first.