OT

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

Tim Lines said:

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Once again, the nation was traumatized by the
WTC attack.

Wrong. The attack was minor. Seeing it endlessly replayed on every TV
in the nation for 2 months afterwards was the traumatizing part.

I'm stil pretty freaked out and tried very hard to not see it - and
largely succeeded. I still haven't seen complete footage of the
towers falling. Though I live in the city where it happened and
used to work in 1WTC, so maybe that is part of it.

In 2001, we didn't have TV at home (rather we did, but it was connected
to a DVD player, no antenna or cable). There's a break/lunch room at
work that showed the thing over and over. Even though I avoided it, I
still saw it a LOT of times. I know people who were glued to their TV
sets for weeks. How many thousands of plane crashes/ tower collapses
did they witness? I don't know, but it was enough to get GW Bush
re-elected on the retribution platform.

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Tim Lines said:

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Once again, the nation was traumatized by the
WTC attack.

Wrong. The attack was minor. Seeing it endlessly replayed on every TV
in the nation for 2 months afterwards was the traumatizing part.

Dumbass -

It's the Pentagon attack that was relatively minor, both in casualties
and physical damage. The point is that *faking* an airliner crashing
into the Pentagon wasn't necessary if the motive ascribed to the Bush
Admin were true.

For a crime of that magnitude, wouldn't a motive be necessary? It's
like saying the Roosevelt Administration should've faked an attack on
LA to start a war w/ Japan. They didn't need any such faked event, they
had Pearl Harbor.

I agree with your premise and conclusions.

I'm just pointing out the difference between the actual event and our
reaction to it. We, collectively, chose to be traumatized. Being
traumatized was among other things the patriotic and caring thing to do.
Absolutely no one said "Worse [censored] than this happens all the time,
let's move on with our lives." That would also have been a reasonable
response.

Jack Hollis said:

It's all a matter of degree. In this case, the theory is so far out
that only an idiot would believe it.

There's truth to this, but I don't know how you determine degree. I know
people who've actually been diagnosed as delusional (not the same as
normal, run of the mill RBR delusional) and they have days of lucidity,
days where there might be a point in all of their rambling, and days
where they're totally kerbonkers. During those in between days, there's
a tendency to throw out the baby along with the bath water, so to speak.
I've always felt I was being unfair when I was tempted to just blow them
off.

So you'd be doing me a favor if you'd explain how that "Whoops! Now
you're just being an idiot!" line can be consistently located.

In article said:

(not the same as normal, run of the mill RBR delusional)

That's a contradiction in terms, TIm. But I know what you mean.

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Michael Press said:

Let's get our technical terms correct:
IQ Range Classification
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

So where do dumbasses and igoranuses fit in ?

Tim Lines said:

In 2001, we didn't have TV at home (rather we did, but it was connected
to a DVD player, no antenna or cable). There's a break/lunch room at
work that showed the thing over and over. Even though I avoided it, I
still saw it a LOT of times. I know people who were glued to their TV
sets for weeks. How many thousands of plane crashes/ tower collapses
did they witness? I don't know, but it was enough to get GW Bush
re-elected on the retribution platform.

Osama can't destroy western civilization. Where would he be without the tv
networks ?

Tim Lines said:

work that showed the thing over and over. Even though I avoided it, I
still saw it a LOT of times. I know people who were glued to their TV
sets for weeks. How many thousands of plane crashes/ tower collapses
did they witness? I don't know, but it was enough to get GW Bush
re-elected on the retribution platform.

I watched it from hospital where I was being attended for a collarbone
break. Given tom's noticing the recent upsurge in collarbone fractures,
I confidently predict a corresponding upsurge in plane/tower terrorist
incidents. In Belgium.

Michael Press said:

IQ Range Classification
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

Depends. In old English common law, an iimbecile was cosidered of
sufficient mental capability to discern right from wrong and could be
tried, which would put him or her above the range listed. An idiot was
legally unable to discern right from wrong. You could hold an imbecile
accountable, but not an idiot.

Since there is no accounting for most of rbr, we safely assume we're a
bunch of idiots. OTOH, none of us are likely to face criminal action
for the stuff we say, as long as we can keep in a court of English
common law. Old common law, I'm guessing.

The respective positions would remain the same as your list, though.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

John Forrest Tomlinson said:

I'm stil pretty freaked out and tried very hard to not see it - and
largely succeeded. I still haven't seen complete footage of the
towers falling. Though I live in the city where it happened and
used to work in 1WTC, so maybe that is part of it.

I would suggest missing 'United 93' then. The scene where the air
traffic controllers are trying to find the planes as the tower
explodes in the background was a capsule of the emotions of the day.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Donald Munro said:

Tim Lines said:

In 2001, we didn't have TV at home (rather we did, but it was connected
to a DVD player, no antenna or cable). There's a break/lunch room at
work that showed the thing over and over. Even though I avoided it, I
still saw it a LOT of times. I know people who were glued to their TV
sets for weeks. How many thousands of plane crashes/ tower collapses
did they witness? I don't know, but it was enough to get GW Bush
re-elected on the retribution platform.

Osama can't destroy western civilization. Where would he be without the tv
networks ?

That dude LOVES TV and press coverage. I'd love to see how his
fundraising drive compares to Oral Roberts or Pat Robertson. I'll bet
Osama totally smokes those guys. I doubt that you can get reliable
numbers of any of those 3.

"Curtis L. Russell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Michael Press said:

IQ Range Classification
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

Depends. In old English common law, an iimbecile was cosidered of
sufficient mental capability to discern right from wrong and could be
tried, which would put him or her above the range listed. An idiot was
legally unable to discern right from wrong. You could hold an imbecile
accountable, but not an idiot.

Since there is no accounting for most of rbr, we safely assume we're a
bunch of idiots. OTOH, none of us are likely to face criminal action
for the stuff we say, as long as we can keep in a court of English
common law. Old common law, I'm guessing.

The respective positions would remain the same as your list, though.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

"Curtis L. Russell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Michael Press said:

IQ Range Classification
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

Depends. In old English common law, an iimbecile was cosidered of
sufficient mental capability to discern right from wrong and could be
tried, which would put him or her above the range listed. An idiot was
legally unable to discern right from wrong. You could hold an imbecile
accountable, but not an idiot.

Where do you figure that puts George W. ?

Quoted message said:

Since there is no accounting for most of rbr, we safely assume we're a
bunch of idiots. OTOH, none of us are likely to face criminal action
for the stuff we say, as long as we can keep in a court of English
common law. Old common law, I'm guessing.

The respective positions would remain the same as your list, though.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

"Jack Hollis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 17 May 2006 17:44:08 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't blame the people who make films and write books about these
conspiracy theories. Of course, you could blame them for taking
advantage of the feeble minded, but in the context of what people will
do to make money, it's not that bad.

It's obvious that you haven't read Griffin's book. He doesn't draw
conclusions as to any theory of what might have happened. He raises
serious
questions based on the public record and calls for an independent inquiry
that is not limited in scope as the 9/11 Commission's was.

My reaction is to the theory that AA#77 was not what caused the damage
at the Pentagon. Any book that entertains such a theory is not worth
reading, because it's absurd.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

On Thu, 18 May 2006 20:30:39 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My reaction is to the theory that AA#77 was not what caused the damage
at the Pentagon. Any book that entertains such a theory is not worth
reading, because it's absurd.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

The evidence that AA#77 crashed into the Pentagon is absolutely
conclusive. There is no doubt about it. Referring me to some wacko
web site means nothing.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Donald Munro said:

Michael Press said:

Let's get our technical terms correct:
IQ Range Classification
70-80 Borderline deficiency
50-69 Moron
20-49 Imbecile
below 20 Idiot

So where do dumbasses and igoranuses fit in ?

That's a poser. Any smartasses want to clear this up?

--
Michael Press