John Berry <[email protected]> wrote:
> It was not that horrific. Not like a war, or a thermonuclear bomb. Have a >> sense of proportion! >> > > In many ways it is worse. > No question the loss of life is less, but even a pacifist could see a war > or a thermonuclear bomb detonation to be ultimately in the interest of > peace. > I was thinking more of an accidental explosion of a modern bomb, or a terrorist attack with one. This would be worse than the WWII bombs, because they are so much more powerful now. People don't realize that. Actually, thanks to the U.S. and Russia arms negotiations, the megaton bombs have been scrapped, but the ones remaining are still in the hundreds of kilotons I believe. Anyway, I disagree. Even granting that it contributed to peace (an issue beyond the scope of the discussion), a bomb is incomparably more horrific and inhuman than the worst human experimentation even conducted by the U.S. Just measured by cold-blooded standards of the number of people hurt and killed and the immensity of the damage and pain, it was far worse. Books such as J. Hersey's "Hiroshima" and the museum at Hiroshima can only give a slight impression of what happened. The totality was beyond human comprehension. I am not suggesting this was unique. Many other events in history, such as other wars or the Black Plague, were as bad. What I just wrote is similar to what the nuns in Emmitsburg Maryland wrote a few weeks after the battle of Gettysburg, as they struggled to cope with the casualties. They said 'no one can begin to imagine the suffering,' and they were right. > There is a lot of evidence for 9/11 being a false flag event. > Ed and I disagree, for the reasons already stated. Let's agree to disagree, and drop the subject. - Jed
