This was written by someone who was only a couple of blocks away from the Twin Towers on 9/11. She wrote it very soon after it happened, and even if she wasn't an amazing writer, it would be worth reading.
Unfortunately, I think too many people have forgotten what really happened that day.
The language may be a little rough in spots. Justifiably rough, in my opinion, but still and all, you might want to watch who you give it to.
posted
As an American. Sure. I would imagine living in Israel gives one an insight into most things (edit: maybe even all?) Israeli, too.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I keep pointing out that we should forget what happened, or at least get over it, and dwelling on it and celebrating it is highly unhealthy.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Chungwa, I'd like you to meet Tom. Tom, Chungwa.
I'm not talking about celebrating it. But "getting over it" isn't very healthy when those who did it are still out there planning the next strike.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: But "getting over it" isn't very healthy when those who did it are still out there planning the next strike.
Why not? There's a fairly enormous difference between still being hung up about something and actually acting to resolve it; the former doesn't make the latter any more likely.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm with Tom on this one. And, in essence, I've been of that opinion since the instant we knew what had happened. And I don't mean "get over it" as in "forget it." What I mean is that we did not need hysterics. We didn't need to flex our muscles and turn into a police state either. What we needed to do, and still need to do, is to calmly announce to the planners and perpetrators that they will never get any quarter or any rest. That when they show their faces they will be captured and not face instant death, but a long and laborious process of lawful incarceration and a fair trial.
What we needed to do, and still need to do, is show that this isn't going to faze us. That we don't care how fast or hard you run, we will be inexhaustible in our efforts to find you. Period.
And the other thing I would've done is work WITH the Arab nations. I would've challenged them. Give us Osama in 30 days or we'll go in and get him and there will be nothing left where we pass. It's your call. Turn him over or get out of the way but you have 30 days in which to do it.
And I would've passed NO special laws. I would've done NOTHING different. And I would've rebuilt everything I could rebuild. And I would've paid the victims out of the money I seized from the states that were involved...if I could.
I learned very early in life, there is only one way to deal with a bully. That is to never rise to the bait because it just encourages them. In this case, if you can't kill these people quickly, showing them that they have succeeded in rattling you is the WORST POSSIBLE tactic. And that's exactly what we did.
I won't ever forget 9/11 but not because of the sense of loss over the attack, but the sense of loss for the country in turning into a mindless beast intent on revenge instead of acting like the leader of the Free world.
And I think the missteps that have taken place in the aftermath of 9/11 are likely to be viewed as the real tragedy arising from this situation. That we had an opportunity to do something truly great and noble and we opted for revenge and didn't let a little thing like truth get in the way of that.
Blind and stupid. Enraged. A mob. That's what 9/11 turned us into.
And because that's what our reaction was, the terrorists did win.
I think we have a fine example in Israel of how the tactic of reciprication does not work. It's time to try a strategy taht is a bit more sensible that has long-term viability.
NOTE: This screed isn't really directed at anyone. I sensed the barest hint in the first post that somehow my brand of dealing with this would be classed as "having forgotten" so I wanted to respond to that. I felt this way from the instant I saw the WTC hit for the 2nd time -- the instant we knew it was a terrorist attack. And I've shaken my head watching the country do exactly the wrong thing ever since.
From the Patriot Act to the war in Iraq to the current bumbling mess over Homeland Security.
I see exactly two things that have been done well:
1) One portion of the Patriot Act removes ridiculous restrictions on information sharing between various law enforcement agencies. That has always been a stupid waste of resources, IMHO, and encourages interagency rivalry instead of better law enforcement. I'm glad it's mostly fixed.
2) Improved identification systems. This has had an enormous impact on things like visa violations and has opened the debate on illegal immigration anew. I'm happy about it not because I think the governments' (state and federal) positions are all uniformly wonderful, but because it means we're finally addressing the stupid mess that is our state-specific identification system. It just doesn't work to have drivers licenses be the gateway identification if you aren't going to have some minimum standards. And we finally get to decide, as a country, what we want to do (if anything) about illegal immigrants.
I believe that other than these two (relatively inexpensive) things, the remainder of our efforts post 9/11 have been an expensive waste of people and money. Not that there haven't been some good outcomes (I'll even give Iraq a provisional thumbs up), but that the same objectives could have been achieved more quickly, with less loss of life, and at much lower cost. And the extra spending, to my point of view, is directly traceable to our turning into an enraged mob seeking vengence instead of working deliberatively and cooperatively to bring the planners to justice.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
When people, including country music singers, say people have forgotten, what they really mean is quite clearly that if you don't support the war in Iraq, you support the terrorists instead. Come on, now, have the balls to spew that crap openly, instead of thinly implying it.
I haven't forgotten. I don't see the relevance to attacking Iraq.
That was a fairly well-written vignette. A few things didn't ring true. Mostly some issues of timing that don't jive with my memory of the day. And this line:
quote:Knots of people stand outside, blaming Saddam, testing out possible bright sides.
Well, heck, I wasn't where she was, so I guess I can't dispute it. But I don't know anyone who wondered if it was Saddam. That thought certainly didn't occur to me. Did you think it was Saddam? (Do you think it was now?) I did think of Arab terrorists, but Saddam was still just about the furthest thing from my mind.
-o-
Bob, I don't agree with your number one and number two. We have never had a national identification, and I think that's a good thing. I also believed LONG before 9/11 that it was a good thing government agencies couldn't pool all their information. Keeping that information separate was a good check to the government's power to oppress the people, and I regret the loss of that check.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well, heck, I wasn't where she was, so I guess I can't dispute it. But I don't know anyone who wondered if it was Saddam. That thought certainly didn't occur to me. Did you think it was Saddam? (Do you think it was now?) I did think of Arab terrorists, but Saddam was still just about the furthest thing from my mind.
The first words out of GWB's mouth reportedly, upon being informed that the WTC thing was a terrorist attack were "Was it Saddam."
I see your point about a national ID. I'm not advocating that. I'm advocating minimum standards for proving who you are before a state issues an ID. I also want greater security on them, and I want them to expire on the same date as the visitor's Visa, Student Visa, what have you. Nobody should be given a 7 year Driver's License upon showing a 10 month Visa.
As for sharing info, I want some checks and balances in there. An ideal system would provide a pointer showing that another agency HAS information on a particular person and then the law enforcment entity doing the inquiry can follow up with that agency. So, if the State Patrol in NY has stopped Mohammed Atta and there's a pointer that says the FBI HAS information on him, the trooper can make an inquiry with the FBI. Or the fact that the guy was stopped in NY can be "known" to others.
It doesn't have to be extremely intrusive and I'm a HUGE fan of privacy. What I hate is waste, though. And when we taxpayers have paid for the same information to be gathered 6 different times, I think that's dumb.
I also want civilian control and review. Non-partisan too!
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, it's quite the police state we have here. I heard this guy made this movie about the President, full of clever edits to make him look stupid. And he timed it right before the election. I bet he never gets out of prison.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but my hyperbole limit's been reached.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
It is amazing to me that some of the same people who thought everyone in every level of government should have been in LA a week ahead of this tragedy think we're overblowing the terrorist threat.
The frustration you feel now that the government didn't move faster in Lousiana is nothing compared to the impatience I have with those who are drawing out the Iraq war unneccesarily by giving the so-called "insurgents" hope that their continued murders will somehow thwart our efforts to free the people of the Middle East to be able to resolve their conflicts through legitimate and moral methods.
You really want me to hold my two daughters, one of whom was born the week the towers fell, and just forget the lessons we learned that day?
In the same breath you lambaste the government for failing to prevent Katrina, you call for the government to "get over" 9/11? Stop worrying so much about terrorists?
A coordinated terrorist attack on several cities could leave us with a half a dozen New Orleans situations, only instead of wet suits, the rescuers would need radiation suits.
But hey, that will be okay. Because giving them a chance at democracy, a chance to have their voices heard without the power of death behind them, would really have been a bit of an imposition.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Hm. You had to think about whether you were with us or against us, Megan? *grin*
Oh, I'm definitely with you. I just posted something that, upon consideration, definitely took the hyperbole too far. I was joking, of course, but others might not see it like that.
Gallows humor and all that. Jim does it all the time, and I'm finding it's catching.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sorry for the sarcasm, but my hyperbole limit's been reached.
Can you stand just a little bit more?
You know, the Bush Administration caused the terrorist attack in New York and the Hurricane. The next one they are working on is a major earthquake on the San Andreas fault line. In August of 2001, they got together and decided that the three most likely things that could happen to the US would be a terrorist attack in New York, a major hurricane hitting New Orleans and an earthquake in California. In that order. The first two have already happened. Would you want to live in CA right now? Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
Tom, obviously everybody sees 9/11 through the kaleidoscope they already hold in front of their faces to distort the world, so we'll never agree on what the "real" lessons of 9/11 were, any more than we agree on the real "lessons" of Vietnam or the real "lessons" of Watergate.
But to me, the biggest lesson of 9/11 is this:
That while we, a nation deeply divided between two political parties, sit here arguing which of the parties will first destroy our nation through incompetence, there exist out there people whose real goal, real intention, is to do us harm.
We had the chance to come together. We had the chance to realize that, while we may have different beliefs about how to do it, each of our parties is extremely well intentioned--in fact, they all want the same thing. For everyone in America to be free to find as much joy in life as they can.
And while we sit here, firm in our belief that our greatest enemy is the guy who votes on a different preliminary ballot than we do, there are people out there who genuinely and sincerely want to do us harm.
And that matters. Because of another lesson we learned on September 11th.
Americans can die.
They die in great numbers, and through no fault of their own. We've never suffered civilian casualties like this in an international conflict. Maybe in Hawaii once, but I think we brushed that aside, because Hawaii is still "out there," one island attacked by another island.
We learned that we can't ignore what's happening on the world stage because the world stage isn't going to ignore us.
This isn't a partisan issue for me, so I'm not speaking for Republicans, jebus. Republicans are making mistakes. But they're not making the even bigger mistake I hear so many of the Democrats making, and that's to believe that ignoring the problem would somehow be the higher, nobler ground.
I wish that, rather than single-mindedly pursuing the anti-Bush, anti-War rhetoric they spout upon command, the leaders in the left were actually offering constructive, insightful advice about Iraq.
I agree that the rebuilding efforts there could be better handled. I would love to see the energy and devotion that the intellectual elite is putting into creating an anti-Bush spin on everything go instead into ideas for how to deal with the challenges we've confronted in Iraq.
To me, the war will not be won until the average Iraqi citizen begins to see the benefits of Democracy and realizes it is better than what they used to have.
The left has a tremendous amount to offer in helping to bring this about. The left deeply believes in doing right by the common man, and in Iraq there are a good number of common men who need to be done right by.
Because while we waste our hate on members of our own government, the terrorists are not so choosy. As the deaths on September 11th showed, they hate you and me as much as they hate George Bush or Bill Clinton, and are just as anxious to see us die.
So in large part, it is you and I who need to find in our hearts what we need to do differently because of 9/11.
It is not enough to call for "the government" to go out there and do "something," or to let our soldiers go off and die for us, for them.
There are people who suffer constantly under the threat of what transformed us, after having faced it for only a single day.
Just as important as our anxiousness to send in troops is our anxiousness to show our compassion, our concern. Right on the heels of our troops should be outpourings of donations, of supplies, of goodwill, that come not from the government, but from you and I, from the American people. Things that can be given to them not as trinkets from the US government to buy their affections, but genuine displays of love from the people of one country to the people of another.
And, perhaps more importantly, we need the teachers. The ones who can not only give them food to get them through the night, but the ones who can give them knowledge to get them through their lives. Again, not government cronies sent to recreate nations in our image, but volunteers, American people who have learned to think beyond themselves and their own mud fights in the sandbox.
Isn't that a noble mission? Isn't that a 9/11 cause worth rallying around? That's not a mob mentality. That's not "rising to the bait."
The troops are still necessary. As the unused boxes of school supplies found in the palaces of Saddam's two sons showed us, goodwill alone is often not enough.
But once we uplift and transform the people, give them hope and give them some of the joy it is our privilege to bask in daily, they'll reject the terrorists themselves. They'll reject the corrupt leadership themselves.
But we're so busy bogging ourselves down in partisan games, so quick to use our wit and our intelligence to spin our side or find holes in that side, so busy unmaking each other, that we never get around to seeing what we can make.
This was once a nation where every mother and father hoped their kid would grow up to be President. Now it's a nation where they hope their kid will grow up to take down the President. Yesterday it was Clinton. Today it's Bush. Tomorrow it will be somebody else.
Well, get on with it, then. Pack your mud balls nice and tight. Continue the schoolyard scuffles while there's a murderer on campus.
And above all, never, ever, raise your sights. Keep right on worrying about what America, in its anger, might do to the world, so you don't ever have to stop to think what America, in its nobility, might do for the world.
Because, after all, if we live and let live all will be fine.
We've never been given a reason to believe otherwise.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: To me, the war will not be won until the average Iraqi citizen begins to see the benefits of Democracy and realizes it is better than what they used to have.
Really? You think the War on Terror we've decided to fight will be won when Iraqis appreciate democracy?
quote: And above all, never, ever, raise your sights. Keep right on worrying about what America, in its anger, might do to the world, so you don't ever have to stop to think what America, in its nobility, might do for the world.
I think it's safe to say that this is a straw man. You're arguing against a position that doesn't exist on this thread.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: I don't know anybody who has forgotten.
Other than the continued encroachments on our personal liberties here in the US, it seems to be business as usual. Politics as usual, too.
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: When people, including country music singers, say people have forgotten, what they really mean is quite clearly that if you don't support the war in Iraq, you support the terrorists instead. Come on, now, have the balls to spew that crap openly, instead of thinly implying it.
Um... (a) While I don't have balls, I can't possibly believe that there's anyone here who has read my posts and thinks that I would hint at something rather than say it straight out. And (b) You obviously have no idea why I think the lesson has been forgotten.
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: That was a fairly well-written vignette. A few things didn't ring true. Mostly some issues of timing that don't jive with my memory of the day. And this line:
quote:Knots of people stand outside, blaming Saddam, testing out possible bright sides.
Well, heck, I wasn't where she was, so I guess I can't dispute it. But I don't know anyone who wondered if it was Saddam. That thought certainly didn't occur to me. Did you think it was Saddam?
Yeah, and most people did at the time, too. I remember reading this essay when it first appeared, and it was like a couple of days after the attack. A week at most.
Bush I attacked the rabid dog and failed to put him down. Now Bush II was president and a terrorist attack was committed against the US. Hmm... that's a toughy.
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Bob, I don't agree with your number one and number two. We have never had a national identification, and I think that's a good thing. I also believed LONG before 9/11 that it was a good thing government agencies couldn't pool all their information. Keeping that information separate was a good check to the government's power to oppress the people, and I regret the loss of that check.
posted
Here's the thing. I have a good reason for being anti-Bush. It's not because I enjoy taking down presidents or because I am anti-American and don't remember 9/11 It's because the man is truly, truly incompetent. Everything he has done from the moment he entered office has been posturing, it has been taking a useless product and surrounding it with false aadvertising. I watch him take little pauses, or try to look mature and powerful. It's all a show. It is completely fake. Even after 9/11, I failed to see how he was a strong leader. Promising war and revenge after such a terrible time does not equal strength. But most of the population bought it and agreed with the steps taken in Iraq which not only had nothing to do with 9/11 but has plunged the country into even more chaos! I see a man that lacks compassion and empathy. I see someone who cannot see the finer details or the larger picture. All I see is lies and deception weakening this countyr, making us lose every bit of honour it had... Yesterday I was at the emergency room and they kept showing CNN. I could not help thinking that finally the rest of the country was discovering something I was already aware of. That this president is useless, vancant and vapid and the ones that will suffer for it are the ones on the very botton.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: As for sharing info, I want some checks and balances in there. An ideal system would provide a pointer showing that another agency HAS information on a particular person and then the law enforcment entity doing the inquiry can follow up with that agency. So, if the State Patrol in NY has stopped Mohammed Atta and there's a pointer that says the FBI HAS information on him, the trooper can make an inquiry with the FBI. Or the fact that the guy was stopped in NY can be "known" to others.
It doesn't have to be extremely intrusive and I'm a HUGE fan of privacy. What I hate is waste, though. And when we taxpayers have paid for the same information to be gathered 6 different times, I think that's dumb.
So you want all local, state, and federal databases with either links or alerts to each other, but it can't be intrusive or invade anyone's privacy.... You are asking for the impossible. How can you have information sharing without sharing information? I will guarentee you that if this was attempted, people would start screaming Police State! or well, more than they already do
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Really? You think the War on Terror we've decided to fight will be won when Iraqis appreciate democracy?
The most amazing part about the fact that you asked this question is that you did it in the same post where you say I set up a straw man.
It isn't an arguement. It's an A.L.S. Arguement-Like substance.
If all we're going to play is semantic games about which war or part of the war I'm talking about or what the definition of "is" is, count me out. I can't take it. I put too much of my heart and soul into these posts. The post I made above was 1,000 words that could have been added on to my latest fiction story.
But once again, I let myself get suckered into checking out hatrack, and I got so worked up I wasted that time emotionally draining myself for a post that will fall off the edge of the forum in a couple of months.
quote:I think it's safe to say that this is a straw man. You're arguing against a position that doesn't exist on this thread.
Tom, you didn't ask me to post an arguement against something in this thread. You asked me to post what 9/11 meant. Specifically, what it meant to me.
Of course, if there's a context to my post, it's not just "this thread," and there's no reason it should be. At the minimum, I'd consider the context to be all the forum threads going on right now. And if there wasn't a larger world for this thread to be talking about, there wouldn't be anything for this thread to say.
But again, I'm getting drawn into pointless semantic games.
My post was not meant to be an argument against anything so much as it was meant to be an arguement for something. Something I deeply and passionately believe. A vision I'd like to create in hearts and minds.
It's not against anything because it's in the middle of all the arguements.
A middle ground that does not seek to forget 9/11, out of fear and worry for where its memory will take us, but that also does not react blindly and without careful forethought. A reaction not in heated ignorance, but in cool rationality. A reaction that is as deeply rooted in sympathy as it is in sorrow. But above all, it is a reaction bound together by unity.
And this seems to be one of the greatest challenges. Because all cries for unity are redefined as calls for conformity. They're mistrusted. They're dismissed.
I'm trying to create a vision here that's so inspiring, sounds so right, that it can overcome that fear the parties have of each other, help us stand side by side again, and maybe even be a bit of glue to bind us together as one.
But here I fall into the trap again. Posting something I care about so deeply that my heart beats faster as I type, that it's like I'm channeling hot lava out of my body through my fingertips, all so that jebus can think of another hilarious zinger, or somebody can split the hairs of the beast I've birthed.
And of course, I betray my conceit, in thinking I can change hearts and minds. Because ultimately the problem isn't that the right ideas can't be found--they can. The problem is that as a nation, we've created an environment where the worth of an idea is based, not on inherent value, but on who has created it. And since you all don't know me from Adam, it's a little bit audacious for me to be so bold.
I don't mean that sarcastically. I really am letting myself get way too worked up over this, and I should probably learn my lesson here.
Again.
That love/hate post about Amazon could have been about Hatrack.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: If all we're going to play is semantic games about which war or part of the war I'm talking about or what the definition of "is" is, count me out.
I would argue that figuring out which war we're talking about is hardly a semantic game.
Which war ARE we talking about? Which war, specifically, will be over when -- and if -- the Iraqi people learn to appreciate American-style democracy? Is it the SAME war that was presumably started by 9/11, the one that taught you the apparently surprising lesson that some people are willing to kill Americans? If not, when will THAT war be over? And when -- presumably at some time when we weren't looking -- did the war that Iraqi democracy will supposedly end actually start?
quote: I'm trying to create a vision here that's so inspiring, sounds so right, that it can overcome that fear the parties have of each other, help us stand side by side again, and maybe even be a bit of glue to bind us together as one.
This sounds beautiful. But tragedy is a poor tool for unity; using tragedy as an inspiration for that unity is more likely to lead to cynicism and corruption, as we've seen over the last few years. It's a nice myth, the belief that people pull together when they need to survive -- but it's not always true. People often devolve down to small individual little units when it comes to survival. And in situations like the "War on Terror," where most of the country doesn't even necessarily feel all that threatened, the best that can come out of it is some poorly-considered decisions propped up by maudlin rhetoric.
There are lots of good reasons to find an inspiring vision to motivate the whole country; I wholeheartedly support such an effort. 9/11 doesn't fill the bill, and shouldn't be crammed into that role.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
9/11 is not forgotten. Not even up here. Nobody wants to forget it.
But nobody wants it to haunt us either, like a broken arm that we once got and, when it suits us it begins to ache so we can rub it pitiously.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Holy crap! I totally forgot about this. It's been, like, 8 hours since I last heard someone reference it. And I was asleep the last 8 hours.
Posts: 3243 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: And in situations like the "War on Terror," where most of the country doesn't even necessarily feel all that threatened, the best that can come out of it is some poorly-considered decisions propped up by maudlin rhetoric.
I could keep going, but I think this pretty much shows that most of the country does feel threatened by a future terrorist attack
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I, for example, feel that a terrorist attack is likely, yet do not feel threatened by same. I am a suburban woman for those of you keeping track of the demographics.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And yet how many people do you know who have actually purchased duct tape and plastic? Or wake up every morning and check to make sure the country is still here?
I'm pretty sure we'll go to war with China in the next twenty years, too, but that doesn't mean that I cringe every time I walk past a Chinese student in our computer lab.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
