That is all.

People who rant about Bonfire but have never participated are idiots.

People who weren't at Ground Zero on 9/11 or on the Polo Fields on the morning of 11/18 have little to no base for arguement or comparison.



-------------------------------------------------------
If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you can read this in English, thank a Soldier.

Someone who was in... let's see... most likely 8th grade on 11/18/99 is calling some of those that were there idiots because they perceive certain emotional parallels between the two.

Participated.

Obviously anybody who wasn't THERE on 9/11 or 11/18 can't be affected by the two tragedies or compare/contrast the two, right?

when will we learn to stop feeding this troll..

I'm not gonna say you all, because it's a minority who make stupid comments like comparing 9/11 or 11/18, but those that do say things like that only bring it upon themselves, and well...by proxy the rest of you.

To me, the physical and emotional damage done on 9/11 happened over 1,000 miles away...nobody I knew was on any of the planes, nobody I knew was in either tower, and I have yet to know anybody that was at "ground zero".

There is one event that happened early one morning almost 2 years prior which is what allowed me to know how those who were not as fortunate to be so far from the damage as I was felt. That event was the Bonfire collapse.

I knew what it sounded like to have nothing but sirens blaring for hours. I knew what it looked like to have a rather large structure in complete disarray and then looking again hoping that you were just seeing things the first time.

I knew what it felt like when people around you were doing their best not to panic and fall to tears even though they were at their nerve's end and just about to lose it...but they kept it together and kept working for the sake of those burried.

The cause of the tragedies are not being compared...but the result. Yes, 11/18/1999 and 9/11/2001 are comparable to those that were near Bonfire in 1999. However, if you weren't in College Station at the time, and can't see the similarities...please keep it to yourself.

i said it in the previous thread as well:

Death is death. Whether genocide or homicide or suicide - all tragedies. Lets not marginalize one form by comparing/contrasting to another.

I agree, I think it's wrong to compare the two, in any way. What happened in 99 was horrible and tragic. So why does it stir people up so much when I think people that compare the two are idiots, when there are people agreeing in saying that the two shouldn't be compared?

quote:

---

I agree,

---

HAHAHAHAH with who, yourself?

no, with this:

quote:

---

Lets not marginalize one form by comparing/contrasting to another.

---

quote:

---

Whether genocide or homicide or suicide - all tragedies. Lets not marginalize one form by comparing/contrasting to another.

---

please include the entire statement...

neither tragedy was genocide, homocide or suicide...

9/11 was in fact both the start of genocide and no doubt homicide...but who's splitting hairs?

Genocide: the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

Homicide: the killing of one human being by another.

A case for suicide could be made too for 9/11. So while Bonfire was not suicide, homicide, or genocide, 9/11 was all three wrapped up into one awful tragedy.

quote:

---

Genocide: the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

Homicide: the killing of one human being by another.

---

9/11 doesn't fit either of these. While extermination might be planned and the ultimate goal of the terrorists...4 planes will hardly fit the entire Christian/American/Non-Muslim extremist population.

nor was it one person being killed by another...had the terrorists targeted a single passenger on the plane, maybe...

it was an act of terrorism...unforseen, un-instigated, and unplanned.

11-18-99 was an accident, unforseen, un-instigated, and unplanned...

get it?

Are we really doing this?

So Hitler wasn't performing acts of Genocide unless he was killing MILLIONS of jews at a time right? Killing 100 or so an hour wasn't good enough to constitute as genocide? Come on, it's gotta start somewhere.

Homocide...remember the part where the hijackers had to slit pilots throats and oh yeah...kill all the passengers? Right.

In summation, genocide in the plot to kill Americans...which is still a stated goal, and homicide in their killing of people on board.

Get it?

an act of war doesn't really fall under the definition of a felony: homocide

the whole plot of taking control of the planes and colliding with a civil structure would be considered an act of war...

there was no systematic extermination of us...therefore no genocide like there was when the Jewish were marked and murdered.

come on back...I'll stay up...

so killing somebody...isn't homicide?

and plans to wipe out a group of people...not genocide?

I'm not debating whether or not it was an act of war, but you seem to be splittling hairs as to whether or not what happened on 9/11 was or was not genocide and homicide, which is plainly absurd.

plans to do it...no...

actually doing it...yes...

so by your argument on plans vs. actuality, then the Holocaust was not genocide, correct? Nor is Saddam's mass killing of the Kurds?

What about the Spanish and French destroying the Native American population? Not genocide either, right? After all, some still exist, just like Jews and Kurds.

The Third Reich was ACTUALLY killing off the jewish systematically...

Saddam was ACTUALLY killing off the Kurds systematically...

The Spanish, French, and Americans were ACTUALLY killing off the Native Americans systematically...

see the difference?

The French and Spanish systematically killed off the Native Americans by infecting them with diseases they themselves didn't even know they had? I see...

And Al Qaeda was not attempting to do the same one plane at a time, one attack at a time?

This is ridiculous.

quote:

---

The French and Spanish systematically killed off the Native Americans by infecting them with diseases they themselves didn't even know they had?

---

I was thinking more along the lines of using weaponry and technology that was far beyond that of the Native Americans in order to take land away from them...and yes I included us...because we did...

if you think that a random roadside bomb or a random plane hijacking constitues genocide...I'm sorry, welcome to the world.

no, you're right, it doesn't constitute genocide. But when that act of terrorism specifically targets a group of people rather then just being random (like the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Park Bombings) then it becomes an act of genocide.

so...by making a plan to exterminate the trolls from Texags...I'm guilty of genocide?

nope, but by being able to successfully identify a group as the trolls and then carry out one or any number of acts in an effort to eliminate them, then yes.

point, set, match...

thanks for agreeing with me Terry.

notice how I said you had to carry out the plans.

I'm off to bed, goodnight board who despises me so. I'll come back again with some more ideas from the other side of the fence you all find repugnant!

Just tryin to keep things fresh.

for the record, my earlier post in no way validates your response or provides you with game, set, or match.

quote:

---

notice how I said you had to carry out the plans.

---

which negates what you were arguing earlier...

quote:

---

my earlier post in no way validates your response or provides you with game, set, or match

---

...yes...it does...

and in the end, people who see paralells between 9/11 and 11/18 are, in my opinion, idiots for doing so. The two are alike only in that they are both terribly tragedies in which innocent lives we taken.

That's about all.

So for those of you thinking that a correct retort to a jab or Bonfire related insult is an ignorant and in turn insensitive comment on planes being hijacked on 9/11...get a clue.

May we never forget the victims of both of these tragedies...something we can all agree on, no doubt.

Terry,

please see my earlier post that you never commented on...there are more similarites...and connections...

I saw it, and saw you were wrong, and made an attempt to leave on a amicable note as well as one that relates to the original topic of this thread.

My failure to respond was a response in itself.

quote:

---

I saw it, and saw you were wrong

---

unsubstantiated claim?

how could I be wrong about my own feelings and memories?

your lack of response was actually taken as a response in itself...I left you speechless...

[This message has been edited by TexasRebel (edited 1/4/2007 1:51a).]