> "You see it as merely a "political position" that those murdered were
> imperialists with no right to have those who murdered them brought to
> justice, while I see a callous hateful position."
>
> Not really, I take his argument as being a little more than simply at
> the
> individual level of morality that you seem to. He's talking about a
> 'technocratic elite of empire', which is a reference to a certain type
> of
> person in the Towers doing certain types of critical functions for
> empire.
Really? I read this as calling everyone in the Towers as being a member of that group:
" As to those in the World Trade Center . . .
Well, really. Let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire - the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved - and they did so both willingly and knowingly. "
Sounds like he's talking about an elevator repair guy to me. They're a "technocratic corps", them, and those people who run the heating and cooling systems, the IT people devirusing computers, the cash register operators--after all, cash registers are just little computers--in the restaurant.
Sorry, but this piece of writing is, as a work of rhetoric, crap.
John A