posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 03:31 AM
That's strange, because I wasn't even worried when the events were just taking place, let alone scared years afterwards.
I was just surfing around one day and happened to come across the information, and read it through without any bias one way or the other really, and
lo and behold! Apparently I somehow became frightened of the events that had took place years earlier, after they had taken place, when I wasn't even
frightened to begin with. That makes about as much sense to me as the Bible, which isn't much I'm afraid. I say this knowing you'll probably dimiss
me by telling me that I was afraid, as if you know my emotional past better than I do, or that you suspect I'm lying right now (as if I would
have any reason to) or some such bs.
At any rate, a threat from within your own country seems to me as if it would frighten someone more than a threat originating from halfway across the
world. In my opinion, it seems as though you just cling a little too tightly to your preconvictions, and then try to justify yourself, in your
insecurity, by attacking the justifications and supposed underlying psychological states of those that oppose your way of thinking. We can make
assumptions on each others' underlying motivations all day. I suppose that's why there are other threads in which to debate the physical evidence of
things like 9/11. That seems like it would be logical to do, before going around and arrogantly diagnosing psychological issues to masses of people.
Btw, I wasn't alive during either of those wars.