Banner
    9/11: Science predicted the Castration of a Phallus Symbol
    By Sascha Vongehr | September 10th 2010 10:12 PM | 28 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Sascha

    Dr. Sascha Vongehr [风洒沙] studied phil/math/chem/phys in Germany, obtained a BSc in theoretical physics (electro-mag) & MSc (stringtheory)...

    View Sascha's Profile
    9/11 implies some sort of terror for everybody, mostly in form of boundless hypocrisy. Was it unimaginable, unthinkable? I knew 9/11 would happen since I first saw the twin towers in 1995.

    I was up on the top visitor platform of the Empire State Building, looking at Manhattan and the twin towers of the “World Trade Center” (WTC). As a child, I was fascinated with psychology, topics like body language. As a teenager, I looked at anthropology and sociology. Claude Levi Strauss introduced the social human to me. Such knowledge leaves no doubt about that the twin towers constituted a huge phallus symbol. Any primate, well certainly every human does recognize this on some level, even if they do not grasp it consciously and intellectually. These towers were the largest, most naked, stiffest phallus symbols in the history of mankind.

    Manhattan is like an outstretched arm, the hand at the end gave the erect middle finger, double penetrating dildos even, like a proud Brit flipping off. Giving the bird, ostensibly with an outstretched arm pointed away from the mainland’s body, an insult directed out towards the south, to show the whole poor rest of the world how it is and what it is going to be, “who is your daddy” right “in your face!”


    This message was not only globally understood, it was also subconsciously intended. This was not the New York or US trade center, this was named “World Trade Center”. It is universally understood by all humans and many primates that an erect phallus signals dominance and aggression. Phallus symbols are used in warfare. Especially South America, but also Asia, Africa, and basically almost the whole rest of the world understands that bombs are not the main currency dealt out in the war that is consistently fought. We trade. We shoot not with bullets, we strangle with dollars. On this view, it made perfect sense to aim at the WTC and the Pentagon together. You do not agree? You do not have to – it is enough if much of the world perceives it so, and apparently, it did. Why was this perception allowed to arise in the first place? The answer is the stupidity that comes with pride. A more modest society would have never let it come to such a monstrous insult in the first place, with or without knowledge of psychology.

    When I turned away from the twin towers on that day in New York on the Empire State Building in 1995, I thought to myself: “Those will be there only temporarily!” I like to get on high buildings to look down and ponder ants and humans. I was tempted to scale the towers, but I was too afraid, because I expected that they would go up in smoke sooner rather than later.


    What's the science here? Firstly, I made a prediction. You do not predict by gazing at the stars, consulting tarot cards or crystal balls. There is only one way to be a seer at times: A solid basis in scientific knowledge and much training and experience in using one’s brain rationally is the only way to predict what is likely to happen in the future.


    Secondly, although I knew of the approaching danger, the same kind of knowledge also obviated that all who saw this coming had no way to warn the public about it. I would have been put away
    in an institution or at least my visa would have been revoked and I send home as an anti-American trouble maker.


    On 9/11/2001, I found my girlfriend in front of the TV, watching a tower burn. I remarked that I rather expected a truck-bomb on the ground floor to bring the towers down one of these days and that anybody intend on a large body count would have flown into a much lower floor. Looks like they tried to let most people escape – go figure. Since then, every 9/11 bombards us with rubbish and reminds me that I predicted the inevitable castration of the most irresponsibly, insensitively put, hugest phallus symbol in the history of mankind.


    This would be the end of this entry, if we lived in a free world with semi rational people, but effectively I am not allowed to end it like this. I must address my suffering, feigned or not.

    Should I feign mourning? I cannot let myself sink so deep. It is hypocritical to mourn for such a small number of people while very many more are suffering and dying due to the usual grind on a daily basis. We do not even need including body counts outside of the US. It is mainly US citizens that suffer from and get killed by the US, from its guns, car culture, air of fear and distrust, its huge prison industry, effects of drug prohibition, poor scientific education, and so on – all of which worsened through 9/11 and the wild and ongoing rage after the monster was castrated.

    With so many innocent people in US prisons suffering right now as you read it this very moment, how could you possibly participate in ridiculous charades around a few thousand people whose fate some years back one can exploit for right wing propaganda?


    Today, because it is 9/11, the media are so preoccupied with mind numbing 9/11 hypocrisy, you can be sure that all the shit that is going on goes on especially uninhibited. I identify as a scientist, and this is not to be confused with having a career in a social construct like academia. It means a bird’s eye perspective down onto the lines drawn in the sand. It implies to try to be a step ahead and look into the future. It means learning from the past. Let us honor all the millions of victims of 9/11 properly; let us demand real science education in the US.

    Comments

    Aitch
    "You do not predict by gazing at the stars, consulting tarot cards or crystal balls. There is only one way to be a seer at times: A solid basis in scientific knowledge and much training and experience in using one’s brain rationally is the only way to predict what is likely to happen in the future."

    Wow! That's pretty bold
    I unscientifically predict there will be people strongly disagree with that assertion - me included!

    The whole twin towers thing is so much of a propaganda exercise from design conception to ultimate destruction, to the construction of a post trauma psychological fear tool....it just makes me go ---YUK!

    It absolutely reeks of the worst of mankind's abilities IMHO, but it is likely to add to the story, if only because, like Presidential Assassinations, it appeals to the macabre in our societal model image, like a shadow over the soul.
    ......if you let it

    I prefer not to be so morbid

    May peace be with all associated with this event

    Aitch
    Hello Sascha

    Taking into consideration your preaching of science throughout this post, I would be more impressed if you could give some sort of proof for your foretelling of the event, as opposed to just claiming it.

    That said, although I have avoided conforming and rattling off parts of your blog I liked before giving my opinion, I did enjoy reading your blog.

    Regards Anonymoose.

    vongehr
    "I would be more impressed if you could give some sort of proof for your foretelling of the event"

    Yeah, right, sure dude, I will produce conclusive evidence proving I knew about 9/11. LOL!
    If you knew reality, you would know that if I had such evidence, I would have burned it a long time ago! Listen up and grasp everybody: I was by far NOT the only one who knew! You could have (should have) known, too!
    Quentin Rowe
    Hi Sasha,

    Surely a guess is as good as any other prediction... how you back up a guess in science is really what science is about, but as for predictions, it's the getting it right that matters.

    As for your comments on phallic symbols, another example springs to mind. The black monoliths in Arthur C. Clarke's 2001 Space Odyssey. Tall upright, and very hard, and it seems one touch triggered them off! Compared with the Lord of the Rings adventures with a small and innocent looking ring, which when you think about it, is quite the opposite in symbolism. Yet each represented a technology wielding great power. In Tolkien's Rings trilogy, this was balanced by a big tower at the center of the evil empire, with its all seeing eye.

    Regarding the towers and events of '9/11' (here in N.Z. for us it happened on 9/10 as we are on the leading edge of the dateline), looking from the outside gives us a perspective different from those closer to 'ground-zero'.

    As then president of the Society of Manufacturing Engineers (SME) New Zealand chapter, I wrote an editorial in our local newsletter. The question I posed was: What is the response to be? Is it to be 'business as usual', or will the USA rise to the occasion and show leadership in the wake of a tragedy, an act of war? Well, I was still president the next year, and on the anniversary I wrote an editorial expressing my disappointment and anger at such a botched and emotional reaction. The answer, sadly, was 'business as usual'.

    In 2006, I sold my manufacturing business, and flew to the USA, where I purchased a motorcycle in L.A., and spent two months riding up to Washington state to see a friend and then across the top to N.Y.C., (and eventually Long Island where I visited Tesla's neglected Wardenclyffe lab.)

    My last visit to the US was one month before 9/11, and the contrast at the airport was telling. From relaxed, happy and welcoming, to officious, obnoxious, and demanding my fingerprints like a common criminal. The smell of fascism lurked just around the corner. I was here to confront, face-to-face, the nation that has such an influence in the world, and therefore my life. And yes, I was pretty pissed off.

    What a fantastic journey I had. My faith in the US was fully restored, at least with the people. Politicians and military commanders still seem stuck in a pattern with a history stretching back thousands of years, but the individuals I met, again and again, were friendly, outgoing and always willing to help. I was in
    Minneappolis on the 9/11 anniversary, and picked a small local rag expecting hysteria and fanatic nationalism, but was presently surprised to find a selection of brief interviews with random local citizens expressing tolerance, and pragmatism. It moved me to find this, and I cherish that moment now, sitting in that small cafe, ready to ride into the night once more.

    It made me realise that the so called polarity exhibited by the media is just that, and exhibit, created by the media itself. Where were the media in pointing out the blatant warmongering going on to justify invading Iraq? Right in bed with the warmongers, and proudly stating so.

    Let me state it clearly and categorically to big media: Your behaviour at that time was disgusting, inexcusable, and deadly. I do not trust big media and your vested interests one iota, and I teach all children I know just that - do not trust a single word published by today's media. They have their collective fingers up the bums of big finance, the military, and our politicians. What is more, you continue to demonstrate it every day.

    As for the folks of USA, putting aside the small minority of fanatic extremists in your nation, you belong alongside all the other warm, friendly and helpful people all around the globe.

    As for the twin towers, when I was in NYC, I chose to enjoy the positive vibe of the city, and thus did not visit the graveyard of 3000 innocent people, of whom I knew none of.

    As for the oft unmentioned Pentagon?  A 'Legitimate' military target.


    vongehr
    Quentin, thank you for your interest and the further examples supporting the ubiquity and power of phallus symbols. I have only a few minor quibbles with what you write, and one is that I would be careful with romanticizing "faith in the US was fully restored, at least with the people. Politicians and military commanders still ...". If in China, you can maybe say this (also not), but in a "democracy"? There is a difference between people you meet with a motorbike going up the west coast and the bulk that makes the US. I lived 11 years in LA and only ventured a few times into the heart of the bible belt when I really had to for conferences. There is a reason I did not go often! And even in LA, when at times leaving my self-imposed selective environment (university, internationals, new china town, ...), meeting average people can be a shocking experience at times. For example, I did not know what racism and religious fanaticism really are before I went to America. What I was calling these names while still in Europe was basically middle ground.
    Quentin Rowe
    Aye, true... I am romanticizing my journey. It was more than the west coast though... actually coast to coast, so quite a 'cross-section' actually. My bike broke down more than once due to a hard-to-trace electrical fault. This is where I got to see some really helpful people. I was very happy to get out of L.A. which is where most of my biased view, via Hollywood, of USA derives from, aside from the news media. Out of L.A., I get to see the 'real' America.

    Statistics and science are no use to me here though. It was a personal journey, where I can pick and choose my meanings. The essence of this journey was to re-write many of my biases and beliefs, and I achieved this to a degree.

    Without aiming to, I came across the pain of the American Indian populations, in places like Wounded Knee, and southern Dakota, and pointed out that my nation, New Zealand, shared a similar method of 'nation' building.

    On a national scale, the massive and obviously costly infrastructure that make the US economy tick along was impressive. But what impressed me the most was the disparity between the homeless and poor compared to the rest of the mostly well-off citizens. I was in the country for five minutes before I was asked to donate to victims of hurricane Katrina, which I gladly did. I remember thinking this was a good example of a country unable to save itself, let alone attempt to 'save' others.

    I recall a conversation around a camp-fire in coastal Oregon. I was with a group of people, one of whom expressed a fear of a nuke arriving by missile from North Korea. N.K. was threatening this at the time. I recall being appalled that she was suffering anxiety from this unlikely occurrence, and pointed out that the US had been an active participant in terrorizing all nations of the planet with threats of nuclear war, since going to the tremendous effort of creating the' monster' in the first place.

    What I really noticed was that I was free to speak. This is the foremost idea advocated (though not invented by) the USA that I support. I commend them for that, but note this is being eroded.

    Yet, deep down, after all this criticism, I still feel a compassion and connection with all the people I met. Romantic, yes.
    rholley
    I find the "phallus" comparison most distasteful, and particularly inappropriate considering the enduring hurt that the incident has caused.

    The Twin Towers may have been a symbol of pride, but the people that died there were by and large ordinary people who in no way deserved to be singled out for destruction.
    Robert H. Olley / Quondam Physics Department / University of Reading / England
    vongehr
    "the "phallus" comparison most distasteful"

    Science is sometimes, especially if humans are involved, about sexuality. Does that hurt your eyes? There is no frivolous "phallus comparison", but only the objective fact that these were very aggressive phallus symbols, and that anybody with a little sensitivity would have objected to creating such an insult in the first place. This sensitivity can be partially developed by studying those subjects that I mentioned in my post (psychology, biology, anthropology, sociology, ...).

    "deserved"

    Who but only you wrote about "deserved"? Not me! If you refer here to the sense of "if you run with scissors, ...": that should not be approached with a morality laden term like merit.

    "the enduring hurt that the incident has caused"

    In the historical sciences one distinguishes carefully between actual causation and on the other hand a mere triggering. For example, you cannot say that the first world war was "caused" by one little assassination. It was triggered at that point, but the causes that make war go much deeper. Wake up!
    rholley
    I removed my other comment concerning "deserved".  Perhaps my logic was too convoluted, but I was not referring to that other group of people as a whole, but simply to their group of top leaders.  Cicero was writing of a heaven for politicians and generals, I was asking "what about leaders of evil intent who lead their own people into ruin?"
    Robert H. Olley / Quondam Physics Department / University of Reading / England
    Gerhard Adam
    The Twin Towers may have been a symbol of pride, but the people that died there were by and large ordinary people who in no way deserved to be singled out for destruction.
    I agree, unfortunately I can think of few instances where the majority of people being killed, all over the world, are "deserving" of it.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Until people and nations stop thinking that they are justified in killing innocent civilians in the name of a war, whether it's a holy war, a war on terror, a war on fascism, or a war on any other form of extremism, so many more lives are going to be ruined. Surely, there has to be a better way to resolve differences between extremist points of views between countries, religions and hegemonic ideologies? This is why in my opinion we so desperately need a UN that is not a toothless tiger. Noone can justify to me what happened to the innocent people in the Two Towers, though obviously Al Quada do believe it was justified, just like people still try to justify to me what happened to these thousands of murdered women and children in this Youtube clip of the bombing of Hiroshima, to people who didn't even have the right to vote. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9lwvImJqT0
    My latest forum article 'Australian Researchers Discover Potential Blue Green Algae Cause & Treatment of Motor Neuron Disease (MND)&(ALS)' Parkinsons's and Alzheimer's can be found at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    vongehr
    "try to justify to me what happened to these thousands of murdered women and children in this Youtube clip of the bombing of Hiroshima, to people who didn't even have the right to vote."

    If you argue against that, you should not focus on Hiroshima, but on Nagasaki. That second bomb three days later was no more than having a little fun trying out whether a slightly different type of bomb can kill as many innocent children as the Hiroshima one. Nagasaki, not Hiroshima, stands for me as one of the prime examples for science and government hand in hand being able to commit absolute evil and rationalizing it.
    Quentin Rowe
    ... That second bomb three days later was no more than having a little fun trying out whether a slightly different type of bomb can kill...
    I have always viewed the Nagasaki bomb this way, but allow for the argument that it demonstrated a more than one-off capability, and was giving a show of strength to the USSR via the incinerated civilians of Japan. Plus good old fashioned revenge of course!

    What needs to be stated here is that collectively, we decided by degree that it is quite all right if we commit mass-murder of civilians and soldiers alike on a grand scale, culminating in the power and efficiency of doing so with the atomic bomb.

    I note that the initial concern regarding atomic weaponry in the early days of WW2 was to prevent Hitler's Germany from developing the bomb. This morphed into a race to build the bomb - quite a different matter from stopping such a destructive weapon coming into existence.

    And here is another phallic symbol for you Sasha... a missile that delivers the mother of all payloads. I remember when India and Pakistan got the bomb, there was celebration in the streets, children recruited to wave flags. People were riding the missile transporters, straddling the missile, 'look at my giant cock'. Pretty disgusting, but at least they were open and honest about what the bomb means to them, instead of this smarmy bullshit put out by the atomic superpowers.

    The sole function of an atomic bomb is to kill a lot of people and destroy a lot of property. Any one that controls such a device merely demonstrates a
    psychopathic bent to mass-murder in the name of [blah blah].

    The farce of the USA and the UK freaking out over Saddam' non-existent W.M.D.'s whilst it possesses such disgusting weapons to me was the height of
    hypocrisy.

    Get rid of them, then there will be some respect shown by all sane people on earth. And do it now. Got that Obama? Show some leadership, you wus!




    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    Just for the record here is the Youtube showing the atomic bombing of Nagasaki with its US army personnel signatures http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOyIcFrSQz4&p=D403CF2209225A71&playnext=1... And as a result of the bombing of the Twin Towers, and rumours of Saddam Hussein's non-existent weapons of mass destruction, here is the knee-jerk reaction of the bombing of Bahgdad in the Iraq war 2003 - Shock and awe live coverage tv http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjGr5_a5yBU&feature=related Surely anyone can see that all of these bombings of innocent civilians are crimes against humanity that can either almost completely annihalate people and/or breed hatred and an endless cycle of revenge killings? For anyone who’s interested, here is a paper by two American professors, Ronald C. Kramer and Raymond J. Michalowski, which analyses the reasons behind the US/UK 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, and argues that it was a form of state crime, because it violated the UN Charter and international humanitarian law. See http://homepages.wmich.edu/~kramerr/BJC.pdf
    My latest forum article 'Australian Researchers Discover Potential Blue Green Algae Cause & Treatment of Motor Neuron Disease (MND)&(ALS)' Parkinsons's and Alzheimer's can be found at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    vongehr
    Just for the record, before anybody accuses me of not reacting against crazy stuff if it comes from a certain, perhaps perceived as by me supported political direction:
    I cannot from China look at any of these videos without proxy server crap. I would feel better without links to youtube here, Helen. A rational mind gains little from watching tear or rage inducing videos, an irrational mind ... . The stuff about Nagasaki was clear to me before the internet existed. Also, it has little to do with my post, which was heavy on scientific aspects, missing science education and suchlike.
    Bonny Bonobo alias Brat
    The Youtubes weren't for you Sascha, you keep saying you can't see it without proxy server crap. The Youtubes were for people like my sons and their friends who are following this blog and who don't really know the history of the subject matter and who like watching Youtubes. Kids who are about to go to university or could even join the army, who are deciding what to study and why, science being one of the options, but If it makes you feel uncomfortable I won't include them anymore on your articles. First you don't like me misrepresenting bonobos with my avatar now you want to get rid of my Youtubes. I'm not sure what you mean by "Just for the record, before anybody accuses me of not reacting against crazy stuff if it comes from a certain, perhaps perceived as by me supported political direction:". I'm an individual and a mother from no particular 'supported political direction' that I'm aware of, who is just randomly picking these Youtube clips to support what I'm thinking and saying, but yes I do shed tears and feel rage for all the innocent lives who have been lost in the Twin Towers on 9/11 and in all of these 'wars' against extremisms of some form. Is that such a problem? You think that a good scientific education for most people will solve a lot of these problems, and that it also helped you to scientifically predict that 9/11 would happen, OK I can agree that this is possible, even though you have no evidence for either. The Kramer and Michalowski paper was something I came across during searches for an assignment, as part of my university education here in Australia, it seemed appropriate as an interesting analysis of what we were talking about here. Intellectual freedom and freedom of the press are very important to me, but probably are not as important in China. I think its wonderful that this blog is allowed to exist on an American server, even though Hank probably doesn't agree with much of the subject matter.
    My latest forum article 'Australian Researchers Discover Potential Blue Green Algae Cause & Treatment of Motor Neuron Disease (MND)&(ALS)' Parkinsons's and Alzheimer's can be found at http://www.science20.com/forums/medicine
    Gerhard Adam
    ...I do shed tears and feel rage for all the innocent lives who have been lost in the Twin Towers on 9/11 and in all of these 'wars' against extremisms of some form. Is that such a problem?
    Actually it is.  I'm not picking on your comment specifically, Helen, but rather I'm using it as a jumping off point in this discussion.

    Conflict is an integral part of biology and between social groups it occurs readily within the same species.  Even within a particular social group, there are crimes which can be committed, which could (figuratively) be considered almost like mini-wars or conflicts.

    I think we can all agree that there are few people that actually "deserve" to die, and yet it will happen and continue to happen because that is the nature of people.  A woman gets sentenced to being stoned to death for adultery;  a killer is placed on death row.  These may seem like extreme opposites, but they are both the product of a society (or social group) that has placed themselves in a position to determine what constitutes "innocence".

    It's easier for most people to agree with the latter, but depending on a particular group's belief, the former may also be considered as guilty.  Consider the conflict over abortion and how each side escalates the rhetoric regarding what constitutes murder.  If someone feels that abortion is murder, someones else will rationalize why it is OK to murder a doctor that performs them.  If someone thinks that abortion is an unequivocal right, then they would have no problem in giving the death sentence to the killer of that same doctor.

    While we can certainly strive to try and approve things, it isn't that much of a stretch to go from Hitler's camps to the killing fields of Cambodia, to the massacres in Darfur.  Each is clearly an irrational action and yet that is what humans do.  Some will argue that not all humans are like that, but I have to disagree.  All of us have the potential to react in precisely such a manner depending on the particular belief or ideology that has been offended.

    We see the negative reaction towards Muslims in the U.S., but similarly Muslims continue to react negatively to Christians and Jews in the Middle East (and around the world).  It doesn't particularly matter what the cause of the outrage is, or whether someone feels they can justify such reactions, but only that they occur.

    When a fundamentalist pastor wanted to burn the Quran, the reaction was violence.  What is difficult, is the rationale that would suggest that behaving violently in another part of the world would have any affect on this particular pastor?  How can anyone maintain the moral high ground in such contradictory behaviors?

    The sad reality is that the more humans profess to abhor violence, the more readily they move to use it.

    I still think one of the best quotes regarding this point was made by Captain Kirk in the Star Trek series:

    Kirk: [War] is instinctive. But the instinct can be fought. We're human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands! But we can stop it. We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill - today!

    Naive?  Perhaps, but I still like it.
    Mundus vult decipi
    Quentin Rowe
    Hi Gerard,

    What episode or movie did your Kirk quote come from?

    I'm curious as to the time this little piece of wisdom harks from, bearing in mind, the quote comes from the pen of a script writer.
    Gerhard Adam
    From the episode entitled "A Taste of Armageddon".
    Mundus vult decipi
    it's one of my favorite quotes too

    http://ntrygg.wordpress.com/2010/04/02/because-we-cant-always-choose-not...

    Evil is banal, not exceptional.

    We have to do more than chose not to kill…today, if we are going to reduce, minimize or end these social horrors large and small.

    We need to see how these horrors large and personal are related consequences of these social behaviors.

    We have to make a concerted effort to see each other as equal humans and not allow systemic discrimination or groups of people to be demonized and dehumanized.

    We need a concerted effort to override the religious and social beliefs that allow us to measure others and find them lacking, less than, unworthy of consideration.

    Each of us is really only as good a person as we treat and regard others. It gets back to that Think and Care idea.

    We have a legal obligation to obey the law, but a moral responsibility to question it.

    Gerhard Adam
    We need a concerted effort to override the religious and social beliefs that allow us to measure others and find them lacking, less than, unworthy of consideration.
    Unfortunately, I don't believe it can be done.  It's something that operates at group levels, so individual feelings don't enter into it.  It's like watching two ant colonies fighting each other.  Does anyone really think the individual ants bear each other some animosity?  They fight for the nest, just as we do for our particular social groups. 

    The notion that our military (or others) are fighting because we consider our opponents less than human is simply not true.  It's a stance that may evolve over time to rationalize our actions, but it isn't an attitude we begin with.
    Mundus vult decipi
    vongehr
    "I agree, ... "deserving" of it."

    Dear Gerhard, I would be careful with agreeing on a statement that is on the surface maybe more or less right, but in substance (consciously or by successful indoctrination) designed to implicate something I did never write ("deserved") and that aims to steer a discussion away from the actual substance into a dance around distracting pseudo issues.
    I don’t agree with this article. I suggest you read “The Science of Liberty” by Timothy Ferris. At least consider the ideas Ferris puts forth in his book.

    vongehr
    I don't agree with this comment. I suggest you read "Classical Electrodynamics" by Jackson. At least consider the ideas Jackson puts forth in his book.
    Hank
    Writing "bwa ha ha" is not as telling as if you actually heard me laugh when I read this comment.   
    Wow! I got a response! I should check this email more often.

    That global terrorism would eventually have a successful event on American soil was predictable - that it would be as successful as 9/11 was - well, even high impact events are going to occur periodically - emergency preparedness is all about risk managing threats.

    Part of the people who are disagreeing is that their brains remain too firmly in the shock and awe mode of those who died on 9/11 becoming sainted martyrs who died because they went about their normal day

    as opposed to those regular people who fell from grace and are in jail for pot or other such nonsense that religious puritanicalism has elevated to crime

    it's funny, religion's method is to bow down to a god to protect or punish

    rather than using our brains to predict, deflect, minimize and prevent - which we need to do more at the beginning, as you say - stop flipping off the world and forcing people to respond violently

    and educate, educate educate and share what we've learned with the world to make so called World institutions truly world wide and not just an in your face world vanity

    rholley
    Gerhard,

    To your comment of 09/19/11 | 11:14 AM (the indentation is getting a bit much):

    I think you are pretty much right on the nail there.  It makes me think of this bit of Chesterton, writing about Tolstoy and his followers:

     * * * * * * * * *

    « Here is a statement clearly and philosophically laid down [by Tolstoy] which we can only content ourselves with flatly denying:

    ‘The fifth rule of our Lord is that we should take special pains to cultivate the same kind of regard for people of foreign countries, and for those generally who do not belong to us, or even have an antipathy to us, which we already entertain towards our own people, and those who are in sympathy with us.’

    I should very much like to know where in the whole of the New Testament the author finds this violent, unnatural, and immoral proposition. Christ did not have the same kind of regard for one person as for another. We are specifically told that there were certain persons whom He specially loved. It is most improbable that He thought of other nations as He thought of His own. The sight of His national city moved Him to tears, and the highest compliment He paid was, ‘Behold an Israelite indeed.’ The author has simply confused two entirely distinct things. Christ commanded us to have love for all men, but even if we had equal love for all men, to speak of having the same love for all men is merely bewildering nonsense. If we love a man at all, the impression he produces on us must be vitally different to the impression produced by another man whom we love. To speak of having the same kind of regard for both is about as sensible as asking a man whether he prefers chrysanthemums or billiards. Christ did not love humanity; He never said He loved humanity: He loved men. Neither He nor anyone else can love humanity; it is like loving a gigantic centipede. And the reason that the Tolstoians can even endure to think of an equally distributed affection is that their love of humanity is a logical love, a love into which they are coerced by their own theories, a love which would be an insult to a tom-cat.»
    Robert H. Olley / Quondam Physics Department / University of Reading / England