-> We seem to be left with:
-> 1. An unexplained question about the actual identities of those who
-> gained entry
-> 2. An unsubstantiated implication of laxness on the part of those who
-> granted entry
-> Adam
I don't understand why you are having such a hard time accepting that
the 9/11 hijackers were U.S. residents.
The people who left bombs in the London "underground" (subway) didn't
die. They were caught, and definitely identified. They were all young
men who had lived in Britain since childhood. At least one of them was
born there. The others had been brought by their parents from their
native countries, and had been raised in Britain, gone through the
British school system, and so on. I suppose they are British citizens.
Second-generation immigrants - the children of people who have migrated
as adults - usually fit into their adopted country and society better
than their parents. But there are exceptions. Sometimes the kids, maybe
after encountering some prejudice at school, feel increasingly
identified with their "roots". They withdraw from mainstream society
into cliques with others of similar background, and can develop
extremist views and activities. They become fertile fodder for
agitators who want to cause trouble.
It happened in Britain, and I see no reason to doubt that it could have
happened in the States. I am sure that there are plenty of Americans,
native-born or long-term immigrants, who want to overthrow the existing
political system and replace it with something more like what they
imagine would represent their ancestors' ideals. If Bin Laden or some
other "leader" asks them to perform some act of terror in pursuit of
this aim, they willingly do so, even if it kills them.
There is plenty of evidence that the 9/11 hijackers fit this pattern.
They were long-term U.S. residents. I don't know if any of them were
citizens, but it wouldn't surprise me.
dow
|
