> But but you're
> confusing disagreement with distortions of the argument with agreement
> about the argument. No, if you read the entire argument, it's clear
> that
> he's not referring to elevator repairmen.
I disagree. Were the guards as Auschwitz less culpable than Eichmann himself? How about the clerks? The people who ran the showers? The kitchen workers? No, if the bond traders were little Eichmanns, then by Churchill's argument, the clerks were little Nazis, too. He clearly says (and I'm snipping a bit here, but I don't think unfairly) "those in the World Trade Center . . .formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire" and only later goes on to disambiguate, somewhat, bond traders from regular folks. But it's not convincing, joined with all the ranting about kids named Tiffany and Ellington. (And what's wrong with naming a kid after Duke Elegant, anyway?)
All the best,
John A