[Sca-cooks] Agree with Adamantius

[Ann]

< "I put all the blame legally and morally on the actions of the terrorist,"
he said. But he said America's "secular and anti-Christian environment left
us open to our Lord's [decision] not to protect." >

< Not to protect? I'm sorry. NOT  TO PROTECT??? Can I be reading this? A
bunch of murdering "ZZ-Top wannabes" (blame Michael Moore for that one) aim
four jumbo jets at us. Of the four, one creates less than a hundred
casualties, and the remaining three create an estimated combined total of
approximately 6,000. The World Trade Center alone normally housed some
23,000 workers, and this occurs just before 9AM on a business day, and we
have 6,000 combined total dead or missing? Of whom some may yet be rescued
alive? And these idiots speak of not protecting? Consider the possible
extent of damage, and compare it to the actual damage, and it sure looks
like protection to me. Obviously those who've lost loved ones may not see it
that way, but even in the SCAdian community alone, the number of people who
would normally have been at Ground Zero, but for some reason stayed home
late for another cup of coffee and missed their trains, stayed home sick, or
experienced any of several other fairly ordinary delays, is
astonishing...... The majority of New York's more than 8 million citizens
have been, at worst, frightened and inconvenienced, but nothing more.
Adamantius  >

I have to agree with Adamantius.  Although it may sound ludicrous to say
that we were "lucky" to "only" have 5,000 people killed, it honestly could
have been much worse:

1)  the 4 planes were all carrying small passenger loads, only about 1/3-1/2
full.  If the planes had been filled closer to capacity, we would have had
several hundred more casualties just from the passengers.

2)  the plane that hit the Pentagon "happened" to hit the side of the
building that was undergoing renovation and had the fewest people working in
it; hitting the Pentagon in any other location would have resulted in higher
casualties.

3) either fewer people were in the 2 WTC buildings or more people got out of
them in the ~30 minute window of opportunity than I would have ever
imagined.  To see that amount of devastation and know what a relatively
small proportion of the possible people in them died, in addition to the
300-400 people who died going in trying to help them, is amazing to me.

4) finally, the number is lower than it could have been because a group of
passengers sacrificed themselves and crashed a plane into a field a couple
of hours away from where we hold Pennsic each year.  Wherever the hijackers'
intended destination was, it is a given that there would have been greater
death and destruction as a result.

So, I have to agree with Adamantius that Messieurs Falwell and Robertson
are, as usual, off-track.  Looking at it in whole, I'd say someone was
looking out for us.

My 2 cents worth,

John le Burguillun
Atlantia

Postscript:  When I went to send this, our computer ran it through the
spell-checker 1st.  When it got to "Fallwell" it offered "Falafel" as the
correct spelling.  I wonder if there is something it's trying to tell me?