02-11-2009, 02:11 PM
<!--quoteo(post=17300:date=Feb 11 2009, 11:45 AM:name=HemisFear)-->QUOTE (HemisFear @ Feb 11 2009, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->his thing.
So if I come off as angry, and I come off as scared, and I'm not at all convinced that the same government that told our banks to change their lending standards, completely removed any measure of risk, tolerated 30:1 leverage, and encouraged people who have no business owning a home, to own one....you'll have to find it in your heart to forgive me.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, that was the Clintons... Although that probably helps your point by blaming the Democrats [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...+mae&st=nyt (make sure you check that date line)
As for this...
<!--quoteo(post=17300:date=Feb 11 2009, 11:45 AM:name=HemisFear)-->QUOTE (HemisFear @ Feb 11 2009, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The size and scale of both attacks aren't even remotely on the same footing. You have a nationalized, militant group whom fully took credit and basically had a failed single attack with a couple of numbskull's who decided to try and set off a couple of bombs.
In comparison, you had a highly coordinated attack which cost us 3,000 lives, hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue, and directly attacked (or tried to attack) 1. The White House 2. The Pentagon 3. Both World Trade Centers. You then had the head of the organization say that he was going to continue to attempt to end our way of life after taking full credit for the attacks.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you mean by "nationalized, militant group"? You do realize those that KSM, the Al Qaeda 9/11 'Mastermind', was also involved in funding and planning the 1993 WTC bombing? So I'm not sure what you're getting at here.
So if I come off as angry, and I come off as scared, and I'm not at all convinced that the same government that told our banks to change their lending standards, completely removed any measure of risk, tolerated 30:1 leverage, and encouraged people who have no business owning a home, to own one....you'll have to find it in your heart to forgive me.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, that was the Clintons... Although that probably helps your point by blaming the Democrats [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img]
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...+mae&st=nyt (make sure you check that date line)
As for this...
<!--quoteo(post=17300:date=Feb 11 2009, 11:45 AM:name=HemisFear)-->QUOTE (HemisFear @ Feb 11 2009, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The size and scale of both attacks aren't even remotely on the same footing. You have a nationalized, militant group whom fully took credit and basically had a failed single attack with a couple of numbskull's who decided to try and set off a couple of bombs.
In comparison, you had a highly coordinated attack which cost us 3,000 lives, hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue, and directly attacked (or tried to attack) 1. The White House 2. The Pentagon 3. Both World Trade Centers. You then had the head of the organization say that he was going to continue to attempt to end our way of life after taking full credit for the attacks.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you mean by "nationalized, militant group"? You do realize those that KSM, the Al Qaeda 9/11 'Mastermind', was also involved in funding and planning the 1993 WTC bombing? So I'm not sure what you're getting at here.