I've done more than recognize the threat, TreeTwista10. I've fucking quantified it for you. Fear is clearly evident in our overreaction to a traumatic, but hugely unlikely event.

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 10:58 AM. Reason : ...]

9/11/2006 10:56:43 AM

and then you've fucking trivialized it for me by comparing intentional malicious suicide attacks to automobile accidents

9/11/2006 10:58:58 AM

Quote :

"and if you value freedom as much as you say you do I'm sure you are just as aware of every one of these dates"

if you cannot understand the importance of 12/7 then the point is beyond you.

Quote :

"and then you've fucking trivialized it for me by comparing intentional malicious suicide attacks to automobile accidents "

fine, let's compare it to the murder rate.

In 2004, there were 16,137 murders that is far more than the number of people killed in terrorist attacks.

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:02 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:03 AM. Reason : .]

9/11/2006 11:00:52 AM

you act like we should remember 12/7 just as much as 9/11

even though we inherently remember 9/11 more because it happened much more recently AND it happened while we were alive to personally witness it and not just hear about it in textbooks or from grandparents

but if you cannot understand that then common sense is beyond you

9/11/2006 11:02:06 AM

Quote :

"you act like we should remember 12/7 just as much as 9/11 "

We should

12/7 did more harm to the american pysche than 9/11.

If you are incapable of understanding why then all is lost on you.

9/11/2006 11:04:05 AM

You continue to ignore that the risk to your mortality is independent of intent.

9/11/2006 11:05:12 AM

^^Is October 12th more important to you than December 7th?

^You continue to treat maniacs who intend to take as many American lives as possible the exact same as automobile accidents just because of the numbers...everything can't be proven by numbers

9/11/2006 11:07:59 AM

Oh?

Are you going to dispute that you're more likely to die in an auto accident than a terrorist attack?

The numbers are apparently unreliable.

9/11/2006 11:08:57 AM

This whole 9/11 > 12/7 v. 9/11 < 12/7 is pretty stupid if you ask me.

9/11/2006 11:09:55 AM

Quote :

"Are you going to dispute that you're more likely to die in an auto accident than a terrorist attack?"

No but apparently you're going to use numbers to discuss unquantifyable issues like intent

9/11/2006 11:11:25 AM

Quote :

"^^Is October 12th more important to you than December 7th?"

do you even understand the point?


btw, you are more likely to be murdered then be victim of a terrorist attack

9/11/2006 11:16:19 AM

Actually, I'm arguing that the intent is ignored by the numbers because it is irrelevant.

In fact, that's exactly what this means: "You continue to ignore that the risk to your mortality is independent of intent."

The risk that you're under the impression actually exists or are at least arguing should be derived from terrorist attacks is vastly greater than the actual risk.

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:18 AM. Reason : ...]

9/11/2006 11:17:26 AM

^^what happened on October 12th?

^everything cant be determined by numbers

9/11/2006 11:20:01 AM

So, what point are you guys driving at? Yes, statistically I'm more likely to die from a myriad of things that are non terrorism related. What's the point? That we should shift focus or "be afraid" of the other likelihoods? Seriously, where are you aiming?

9/11/2006 11:20:21 AM

Quote :

"trikk311: 2) we do not fear japan anymore for one reason: we defeated them. we went to war...and we defeated them.... in the case of the war against islamic findamentalists...we are not allowed to defeat them....the UN, certain liberals in the US and other nations more concerned with a peace now than a lasting peace later will not allow the US government to do what is necesary to one day live without the threat of violence from islamic fundamentalists. "

Are you saying we should nuke the Iraqis?

9/11/2006 11:21:18 AM

^^ Mortality risks can however.

I'd like to see you argue with insurance company actuaries about this. What do you think sets the rate an individual pays for life insurance, anyway? Magic?

---

Quote :

"So, what point are you guys driving at? Yes, statistically I'm more likely to die from a myriad of things that are non terrorism related. What's the point? That we should shift focus or "be afraid" of the other likelihoods?"

YES.

A healthy reaction to terrorism would be to inform yourself of the actual threat or risk, not cloud the issue by emotionlly obsessing over the horror of its occurrence. Otherwise your fear becomes based purely on irrationality.

If we've decided that living longer is what our society ought to be fostering, then we have to rationally assess what's killing people and at what rates. Without properly informing ourselves of the threat of terrorism relative to other mortal risks, we risk greatly misappropriating our resources according to a threat whose magnitude is determined by emotion, not intellect. That's not how you form sound policy.

How many preventable causes of death are more likely, and more controllable than the threat of terrorism?

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:30 AM. Reason : ...]

9/11/2006 11:21:55 AM

so by your logic hurricanes are not as big a threat as terrorism because less people die

9/11/2006 11:22:45 AM

they'd be less of a threat to mortality, more of a threat to property.

9/11/2006 11:23:34 AM

Quote :

"they'd be less of a threat to mortality"

yes i agree...if you are strictly going off of numbers that is correct

9/11/2006 11:23:59 AM

Quote :

"it is a stated agenda item by the liberals to create quotas to help dig minorities out of their "inferiority". by creating such quotas, liberals acknowledge that minorities are inferior and in need of special help. goldwater saw this, reagan saw it, and thankfully the current administration sees this as well. "

They're not trying to dig minorities out of "inferiority" they're trying to dig them out of oppression and racism, that's why the laws were created.

You're probably just projecting your own racism by perceiving the laws to be a means to correct for inferiority, instead of the reality of the situation. Typical conservative delusion.

9/11/2006 11:24:58 AM

wow treetwista still misses the point he doesn't understand why 12/7 is one of the most important dates in american history and they most important when it comes to the american psyche

9/11/2006 11:25:17 AM

wow nutsmackr still has his blinders on and blocks out everything he hears except for "I completely agree with you nutsmackr"

are you seriously trying to tell me that 12/7 is THE most important date in american history as far as MODERN american psyche?

9/11/2006 11:26:35 AM

I'd say 7/4 is one of the most important dates in american history and they most important when it comes to the american psyche but feel free to continue your "your date in history is less important than my date in histroy" contest

9/11/2006 11:27:48 AM

yes it is

the cole attack not nearly as important

I'll let you figure out how 12/7 is the most important date to the american psyche

^you miss the point too

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:28 AM. Reason : .]

9/11/2006 11:28:22 AM

who mentioned the uss cole attack??

apparently nutsmackr doesnt know when Columbus "discovered" America

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:31 AM. Reason : .]

9/11/2006 11:29:15 AM

So, what point are you guys driving at? Yes, statistically I'm more likely to die from a myriad of things that are non terrorism related. What's the point? That we should shift focus or "be afraid" of the other likelihoods? Seriously, where are you aiming?

9/11/2006 11:30:13 AM

you did twista when you brought up October 12th.

9/11/2006 11:31:19 AM

October 12, 1492

what happened nutsmackr?

9/11/2006 11:31:41 AM

Quote :

"i think some people are scared to remember 9/11 "

You mean like Bush?

Osama bin who?

9/11/2006 11:33:09 AM

^ >.<

^^^^

Your question has been addressed.

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:33 AM. Reason : ...]

9/11/2006 11:33:26 AM

^^like people in this thread that focus on WW2 instead of the current war on terror

9/11/2006 11:33:41 AM

Or a myriad of other things that are many times more likely to threaten your life than a terrorist attack...

---

Quote :

"TreeTwista10: so by your logic hurricanes are not as big a threat as terrorism because less people die"

They're not as big a risk to anyone's mortality, which I'd argue is the perennial definition of threat, so no. Do you have a different definition of threat or something?

Despite salisburyboy-like paranoia about DAARPA weather machines, there isn't anything the government can do to prevent hurricanes from happening or from killing anyone.

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:40 AM. Reason : ...]

9/11/2006 11:34:48 AM

Quote :

" I'd love to see them operate with public school kids on a public school budget."

Boondocks, you may be right about public school kids but you are dead wrong about public school budgets.

In 2004, public schools spent an average of $8,287 per student for public schooling
http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/a/217115.htm

The average is much less for private schools. While I can't guarantee the accuracy of this site (because it is biased), they state that

Quote :

"However: it simply isn't true that public schools are penniless while private schools are wealthy. In fact, the opposite is closer to the truth. According to the U.S. Department of Education, the average private school charged $4,689 per student in tuition for the 1999Ð2000 school year. That same year, the average public school spent $8,032 per pupil. Among Catholic schools (which educate 49 percent of all private-school students), the average tuition was only $3,236. The vast majority of private-school students actually have less than half as much funding behind them as public-school students."

http://www.taemag.com/issues/articleID.19233/article_detail.asp

The figure for Catholc schools probably isn't entirely unrepresentative of private schools as a whole.

The difference may be the fact that the kids are different (mainly that their parents are more involved in their schooling on average) but it isn't the money.

9/11/2006 11:34:54 AM

Twista how long will it be until you stop ignoring my point and actually address it instead of posting nonsense.

9/11/2006 11:35:46 AM

Quote :

" October 12, 1492 what happened nutsmackr? "

Columbus discovered the Bahamas and began planning how to enslave the natives there?

9/11/2006 11:37:38 AM

i like how he dodges the point of this thread and thinks he wins with a strawman

9/11/2006 11:41:00 AM

^^right...but when nutsmackr googled/wiki'd that date he thought i was talking about the cole

yet he is obsessed with 12/7, even though that war is long over and we are currently at war, in a new war

Quote :

"So, what point are you guys driving at? Yes, statistically I'm more likely to die from a myriad of things that are non terrorism related. What's the point? That we should shift focus or "be afraid" of the other likelihoods? Seriously, where are you aiming?"

^yet you think you yourself win with a strawman

valiant effort though...shift the focus to World War 2 in the 1940s to ignore that in 2006 we are in a different war...thinking about the past wars that have long been resolved and ignoring the current war...genius

9/11/2006 11:42:11 AM

Quote :

"Despite salisburyboy-like paranoia about DAARPA weather machines, there isn't anything the government can do to prevent hurricanes from happening or from killing anyone."

Funny Gamecat, I could have sworn I heard a shit-load about how the government was supposed to stop people from dying in Katrina and they didn't do it because George Bush doesn't like black people.

9/11/2006 11:43:08 AM

TreeTwista10, didn't you know that you are more likely to die in WW2 than you are in the "war on terror"

9/11/2006 11:47:55 AM

I finally realize that jbtilley now that I've stopped ignoring nutsmackr's point

9/11/2006 11:49:03 AM

Quote :

"valiant effort though...shift the focus to World War 2 in the 1940s to ignore that in 2006 we are in a different war...thinking about the past wars that have long been resolved and ignoring the current war...genius"

you are still missing the fucking point

and the odds of dying in WWII have not a single fucking thing to do with it.

9/11/2006 11:50:35 AM

I also wonder if nutsmackr knows these dates:

December 7, 1988 - Yasser Arafat recognized the right of Israel to exist

December 7, 2004 - Hamid Karzai is inaugurated as President of Afghanistan.

9/11/2006 11:50:58 AM

that has absolutely fucking nothing to do with the goddamned motherfucking point

think cirtically for one goddamned second.

think what the fuck happened that day and the reprecussions

[Edited on September 11, 2006 at 11:52 AM. Reason : .]

9/11/2006 11:51:57 AM

what is the point? cause all i hear is a bunch of bullshit to downplay 9/11

9/11/2006 11:52:49 AM

What is the point? Because all I hear is how we are missing it

9/11/2006 11:54:43 AM

think about what happened and what it means.

I'm going to allow you to think about it and come to the point yourself.

9/11/2006 11:56:37 AM

9/11 is not really comparable to Pearl Harbor in any meaningful way, except that they are both historical events.

The nature, cause, and response to both are drastically different.

9/11/2006 12:00:31 PM

Quote :

"I'm going to allow you to think about it and come to the point yourself."

Translation: There is none.

I've divined the point to be a 9/11 v. 12/7 pointless debate... but I'm sure I'm missing the point.

9/11/2006 12:02:22 PM

How many people remember 2/15?

Sinking of the Maine... 1898

9/11/2006 12:08:01 PM

was 12/7/41 an important date in American history? Hell yeah it was...but nutsmackr nobody is denying that as far as I can tell...but like someone pointed out earlier in the thread, the Pearl Harbor attack is not referred to as "12/7" like the WTC attacks are referred to as "9/11"...and if the WTC attacks had happened on a date that wasnt the exact same phone number as emergency services, it probaby wouldnt be referred to by the date...but I believe the terrorists intentionally chose that date

The main point I am trying to get across are that 9/11 is more recent than 12/7 by 60 years, and 9/11 was witnessed live on tv by all of us, when none of us, and many of our parents, werent even born during Pearl Harbor, so naturally 9/11 is more familiar to this generation

someone else pointed out that 9/11 might be remembered in 60 years just the same as we view 12/7...as a very important historical date, but something that people in the 2060's wont understand like all of us because they didnt see it...they will hear about it from relatives and history books similar to how we hear about Pearl Harbor

simply put, to our generation, 9/11 is more important...more current...more recent...more memorable...more tangible...more relatable...more familiar...its something we all saw...so please, if you have some profound point, please explain it to us because you clearly havent been clear in what you're trying to convey

9/11/2006 12:13:00 PM