h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I would question the wording in this Entry, "one of the most horrific terrorist atrocities the world has ever known", applied to the 11th of September 2001. It certainly was horrific, but far from the most, or even one of the most horrific of recent terrorist atrocities. The death toll was dreadful, but it was also probably as low as it could be, if the intention was to destroy those buildings without warning, in front of TV cameras.

In South America they call that date "the second 9/11". The first one was the 11th of September 1973 A716591 when Salvador Allende was deposed with extreme violence, causing much greater loss of life and damage to democracy. If the figures are adjusted, the carnage in Chile on that occasion was equivalent to the bombing of the White House and the killing of the President and half a million Americans. Even without adjusting figures, the destruction of World Trade Center was more notable for its surprise, visibility and dramatic effect than for the number killed -- as atrocities go.

I respectfully recommend the replacement of the word "horrific" in this Entry with "widely-reported", "spectacular", "striking" or "shocking", or some word that better expresses the atrocity's most salient feature.

It's hard to choose between horrors, but if proportion is to be kept, we must admit that the backlash in response to 9/11 has been very much more bloody, and has endangered democracy much more, than the original attack.

Note the qualifier 'terrorist'. I would disqualify coups from being called terrorist, because the aim is not to cause fear or shock, but to directly seize power.

Recumbentman pssst ... let's talk in whispers hardly anybody mentions the Crusades, Saddam's Weapons of Mass Dest., the Oil Price Wars anymore ... Persia's the problem now. Remember that axis of evil speech? "If you're not with us you're against us!"
Today's paper reports that some of Uncle George's rockets are soon going to be based in the Czech Republic to protect Eastern Europe .... rockets in the land of that cobbled together power plant of Temelin ... a potential Chernobyl, if ever there was one, all just waiting to go woosh! No wonder I'm nervous

Nervous . . . why would we be nervous.

Beats me, how to make the coup/terrorist distinction, though.

<> do you mean Iran?

My ex-professor of music is a Persian -- his term. He left after the Shah was deposed, and can't go back.

First I'd better explain the Persia / Iran thing for the benefit of one or two confused readers -
Persia (original Persian Empire)extended from the Indus (a river in Tibet and NW India) all the way to the Mediterranean shores. It was founded by Cyrus the Great in 6th century BC. Unfortunately Alexander the Great destroyed it. The surviving remnant, officially Persia until 1935, is today known as Iran.

Re "Nervous ... why would we be nervous" from Recumbentman. Boy, I feel the shiver in your typing finger R! :-

If I was an American I'd be nervous knowing that 10,000,000 of my fellow citizens are having their telephones tapped on the orders of Uncle Sam (or is it Uncle George?). The tip of the oil well?

If I was an Iraqi I'd be nervous knowing that 1,000 of my fellow citizens are being murdered every month ... and that's just the official figures.

If I was a Persian or an Iranian I'd be nervous knowing that the Russians are constructing 10 atomic power plants (remember Chernobyl) on my patch - famous for catastrophic earthquakes.

If I was a Czech I'd be nervous after reading in the paper today that Uncle Sam (or Uncle George)is about to deploy his shoot 'em down rockets at the end of my road to defend Eastern Europe (a tried and tested Russian ploy by the way).

If I was a Cumbrian I'd be nervous about the radioactive fish ...

Sod it. I'm off

I'm not sure about that, Bouncy. It's arguable whether causing terror is the sole aim of a terrorist group, rather than one product of their actions. Many groups who we would probably all broadly agree are 'terrorist', have seizing state power as their aim. The causing of 'fear and shock' are a consequence of their actions, or perhaps a tactic, but not an 'aim' in itself.