You are. Be sure of it.
You should at least remember Bin Ladin's gloating video message a few weeks after... with its whole "we succeeded beyond our wildest expectations at punishing the dirty dogs" angle.
Oh, and just a few irrelevant sidenotes:
Who by? Certainly not the statics expert I remember on German tv explaining, a few hours after, that it wasn't really all that surprising as everybody else was still thinking, and that he
should have. And certainly nobody high up the chain of command of the NYC Fire Department.
(Oh, and yeah, anyone thinking of destroying the building would have been thinking to topple it - destroying more buildings in its path, as talked of in
Fight Club for instance - rather than make it crumble. It was really rather unthinkable to the layman. But even dreaming of that as a best outcome - which of course Atta etc may well have done; we wouldn't know - is very, very different from planning.)
I wouldn't ever think of blaming "a gun" or "a car"... but don't you think fewer such deaths would happen if such things weren't so easy to get access to? Most homicides happen in a drunken rage among family and friends. And robberies are - statistically demonstrably though I don't feel like drudging through the vast amounts of evidence, all of it analysed with partisan interest (by both sides), for a good link - more likely to end in fatalities where guns are more abundant, not that that should surprise anybody. Cars, even more than guns, are certainly too ubiquitous for anybody's good. Not that there's a realistic way of changing
that, so I tend to just fuggetaboutit.
Poll
