[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Just a plane spotted in the sky? It was a large plane spotted where large planes aren’t suppossed to be!
What do you mean “where large planes aren’t suppossed[sic] to be”?
[/quote]
Oh, for crying out loud. As in, where the populace, through their daily experience actually living there, expects large planes to be flying. The last time something similar to this happened Jihadists took down a couple of buildings. Geeze…
Apparently, Obama doesn’t think the plane was supposed to be there either, by the way. Him being pissed and all about clearance being granted for this stunt.
[quote]lixy wrote:
A big plane escorted by two jet fighters is spotted in the sky and people run for their lives. And you call that “logical”?
[/quote]
And yeah, logical. Since a big plane just might have that escort because it’s been hijacked. And, is now flying low in the vicinity of a populated city…
[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Just a plane spotted in the sky? It was a large plane spotted where large planes aren’t suppossed to be!
What do you mean “where large planes aren’t suppossed[sic] to be”?
Surely, you must realize the plane had clearance: In other words, it was supposed to be there!
[/quote]
The last time a big ass plane was that close to buildings in NYC, it wasn’t fucking supposed to be there.
So you’re going to take people in NYC, many of whom narrowly survived the last time, and throw an exactly similar situation in there, and expect them not to react?
Honestly, shit for brains, this probably wasn’t even their call. When your brain sees something that it doesn’t expect to see, it searches around for similar experiences so you know what to do. Kind of like how in a streetfight, a boxer is going to be programmed to do exactly like he has been trained.
So all the people who lived through this once saw that plane flying damn close to buildings in NYC escorted by a fighter and panicked because, for some at least, that was all their brain could come up with to relate to it.
Makes fuckin sense to me.
I’d rather be paranoid than covered by the rubble of the building that fell on me because I brushed it off.
[quote]
If they were anywhere near rational, 70% of them wouldn’t have supported the invasion of Iraq.[/quote]
Complete strawman that has absolutely no place in this argument.
Maybe you’re turning into sissies over there. But there is a difference between “paranoid”, “prepared”, “aware” and other terms that differentiate between states of mind that people will hold after having gone through a traumatic event.
I live in the shadows of the WTC. If I saw that fucking plane flying that low, I’d be the fuck out of there. Call me a sissy- I’m alive. What the fuck do I care what some scumfuck Moroccan thinks?
Way to go with slanting all your bullshit. You should be on Al-Jazeera.
Why was this a hush-hush operation anyway? That’s the part that makes no sense.
The guy in charge of this needs to fall on his sword. Inciting panic in NYC, forbidding NYC officials from smoothing things out, and wasting $500,000 in an attempt to get a photo that could’ve been done on Photoshop in twenty-minutes?
Absolute incompetence, and whomever was in charge of it needs to get whacked.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Just a plane spotted in the sky? It was a large plane spotted where large planes aren’t suppossed to be!
What do you mean “where large planes aren’t suppossed[sic] to be”?
Oh, for crying out loud. As in, where the populace, through their daily experience actually living there, expects large planes to be flying. The last time something similar to this happened Jihadists took down a couple of buildings. Geeze…
Apparently, Obama doesn’t think the plane was supposed to be there either, by the way. Him being pissed and all about clearance being granted for this stunt. [/quote]
The plane in question is Air Force One’s backup and it had two fighters escorting it. You can’t tell me somebody high high didn’t authorize this.
And Obama not thinking the plane was supposed to be there, doesn’t mean he wasn’t OK with that before NYers freaked out. Panics cost lives, you know.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
The last time a big ass plane was that close to buildings in NYC, it wasn’t fucking supposed to be there.
So you’re going to take people in NYC, many of whom narrowly survived the last time, and throw an exactly similar situation in there, and expect them not to react? [/quote]
I expect them to use common sense. They had more chance of being struck by lightning than living another 9/11.
My point exactly. That, plus all the be very scared orange-terror mushroom cloud propaganda, pushed logical reasoning out the door.
You don’t condition someone using math. You do it by appealing to emotions, and this is an illustration of how succesful it was.
Again, yes.
[quote]That’s what made it stand out.
I’ll go with paranoid population.
I’d rather be paranoid than covered by the rubble of the building that fell on me because I brushed it off. [/quote]
Paranoia and fleeing a building in a frenzy can kill people too.
The risk assesment in that situation was a no-brainer.
[quote]If they were anywhere near rational, 70% of them wouldn’t have supported the invasion of Iraq.
Complete strawman that has absolutely no place in this argument. [/quote]
How is that a strawman?
The war on Iraq was sold on a pretext: saving American lives, because evil Saddam was allegedly going to use weapons (he didn’t have) to kill people on the other side of the planet.
For a normal person, the absurdity was obvious. And a lot of people (and I mean, A LOT!) saw it. Americans were paranoid, and the government capitalized on that to sell the necessity of yet another war. Did they think about all the dead Iraqis? No. Precisely because they didn’t think!
When the OMGZ!1!!A-RABS!TERRORISTS fever cooled down, then the thinking started and the 70% initial support dropped.
By we, I mean people.
Remember bird flu? Do you travel much and go through security procedures at airports?
How about the journalist from Le Monde Diplomatique? How “aware” is it to divert a plane because a guy with a pen is on it?
That’s bloody paranoia!
Then I will call you a sissy. And you don’t have to care what I think.
But let’s at least agree that there are more many many many times more chances of people being hurt by a swarm of people rushing in panic to exit a building, than of the plane actually being flown into said building.
[quote]lixy wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
The last time a big ass plane was that close to buildings in NYC, it wasn’t fucking supposed to be there.
So you’re going to take people in NYC, many of whom narrowly survived the last time, and throw an exactly similar situation in there, and expect them not to react?
I expect them to use common sense. They had more chance of being struck by lightning than living another 9/11.
[/quote]
And they had a better chance of being hit by lightening and bit by a shark then living through the first one.
Didn’t stop it then, did it? So I’d say if you’re playing the odds, you’re asking the wrong people.
Wrong. This was not an appeal to emotions- this was instinct. This was “I’ve lived it once, the circumstances are the same, I’m not staying here to find out.”
That’s not emotion. Was emotion used in drumming up support for Iraq? Yes. But that is not the situation we are talking about. You are, unequivocally, wrong.
?
I don’t recall hearing about any deaths. Yet another strawman. You like that shit huh? It’s easy to use when you don’t want to answer any questions. You’re awfully good at it.
The drumming up of sufficient propaganda to begin a war on another country when there’s no factual evidence is a long, involved process.
That is complete different from someone in a building in NYC who sees a plane flying too close escorted by a jet fighter after having dealt with 9/11 once.
They are two different situations with two incredibly different courses of action. So its a strawman because the comparisons aren’t equal at all. I’m guessing you’ve never taken logic classes huh?
Good, because by “you”, I mean “you”.
Yet another straw man that doesn’t relate to what we’re talking about at all. You’ve pulled this out of your ass and somehow tried to connect it to your current line of bullshit, but it doesn’t work. Once again, logical fail right there.
[quote]
I live in the shadows of the WTC. If I saw that fucking plane flying that low, I’d be the fuck out of there. Call me a sissy- I’m alive. What the fuck do I care what some scumfuck Moroccan thinks?
Then I will call you a sissy. And you don’t have to care what I think.
But let’s at least agree that there are more many many many times more chances of people being hurt by a swarm of people rushing in panic to exit a building, than of the plane actually being flown into said building.[/quote]
Except that people didn’t get hurt. No one got killed. But when a plane got flown into “said building”, lots of people died.
So as long as you completely disregard the empirical evidence along with any semblance of common sense, I guess you’re right.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
How about, because they believed a bomb was likely involved?
It’s easy to sit here and lecture about the obvious: you don’t need cutters when you got a bomb.
[/quote]
Wow. You might need boxcutters (or at least some kind of weapon) to help maintain physical control if it goes the way of a routine highjacking. The bomb, or the belief that there may be a bomb, implies that even if gang rushed and the highjacking threatened, the plane will simply be blown up. But our knight in shining armor, clairvont as lixy is, would have recognized this was no normal highjacking, but a suicide mission. At which point lixy would’ve whipped some terrorist butt! Like a regular Moroccan Rambo.
[quote]lixy wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
The last time a big ass plane was that close to buildings in NYC, it wasn’t fucking supposed to be there.
So you’re going to take people in NYC, many of whom narrowly survived the last time, and throw an exactly similar situation in there, and expect them not to react?
I expect them to use common sense. They had more chance of being struck by lightning than living another 9/11.
[/quote]
Meth is bad news, man. Never used it but have seen the effects. Try Spike, its great!!
Bottomline, you have more chances of being struck by lightinng than dying in a building because a plane was deliberately flown into it.
[/quote]
Really?
Let’s see, an average of 400 people year are hit by lightening in the US, of that number about 60 are killed. That is out of a population of nearly 300 million. Now, the probability of being struck by lightening in NYC is probably much much lower due to the number of high buildings with lightening rods attached that would divert lightening strikes away from the people below. I could not find any stats for NYC regarding lightening strikes, so it must be a statistical rarity. But we will use the national stats to give your comment a better chance.
Your chances of being struck by lightening in general are 1 in 2,320,000 - you are more likely to win the lottery than to be struck by lightening.
Now, let’s deal with the WTC attack - approx 4 million people in lower Manhattan at the time of the attack - 3,000 were killed and over 70,000 were injured. - your chances of being killed in the WTC attack - about 1 in 1,300.
So basically your comment is 100% pure grade A Certified BS.
The people of New York witnessed and endured a horrible event, to see a similar flight path and behavior is bound to scare these survivors.
If you think that’s funny or in some way an illogical reaction - you only prove how far down the rabbit hole you’ve crawled . . . .
The people of New York witnessed and endured a horrible event, to see a similar flight path and behavior is bound to scare these survivors.
[/quote]
And Obama knew nothing about it, and his minions reasoned that the people of New York would NEVER, just NEVER, think it was another 9/11.
If this happened with Bush in charge, there’d be marches on the White House to tar and feather him. Yet the Messiah still gets high ratings and the people would happily vote for him again.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If this happened with Bush in charge, there’d be marches on the White House to tar and feather him. Yet the Messiah still gets high ratings and the people would happily vote for him again.