What exactly happened on 9/11/01?

[SonomaCat]

BAC,

Regarding your FO comment: Nice. Please don't start comparing your 9/11 "connections" to mine or anyone else's until/unless you know specifically what they are.

Unfortunately it is far more than a "goddamn partisan war cry" to me as well, but I don't feel the need to tell you to FO for suggesting that's all it is to me.

Interesting response. You seem to be more interested in trying to spin this little exchange than you are in taking a look at what you said and deciding whether it was appropriate. You were the one who snarkily told me that I would be one of the people who would forget 9-11 (and you left no doubt as to your intent and to your condescension). I told you to FO. I think that's pretty fair. If you don't want people to tell you to FO, don't be an arse. We're going to just have to live that (or maybe you can play it off as having come out wrong or some other face-saving manuever as I'm sure a full-blown "my bad" isn't forthcoming -- I'd be fine with that) instead of trying to pretend that my response to your comment was somehow inappropriate towards someone of your station.

I don't care what your 9-11 experience was, but I do know mine. I'm not the one marginalizing other people's personal experiences with that event solely because they don't agree with your views on politicizing it. You are. If you truly did have any direct connection to the event, you would have had more than enough wisdom to never question the intensity and the lasting power of anyone else's pain and memories from it, so you would have never made that statement in the first place.

Sorry for being so sensitive and defensive about all of this, but the level of disgust I have towards comments like yours is quite high. I don't think I'm alone in that.

[briannell]

el gato - as for 9/11 i don't think anyone in our country forgets what the media exposed them to.

as for vietnam, i don't need any media reminders to know what happened there. Personally I can look at the bullets still lodged in my daddys body, the massive surgical scars, the missing bone in his legs and an outline of the rod used to fuse his spin together to remind me of Vietnam and what happened there, and i wasn't even born yet. I can watch a movie called "we were soldiers" about Col. Hal Moore and see HOW my dad got those 6 bullets, because he was Hal Moore's medic at the battle. Personally, i think those who had loved ones in the towers would not want it shown over and over again, the same way I don't want to see footage of Vietnam.

if you are touched personally by a trauma that horrible there's no need to see constant images of it ov TV, because it stays with you not only in your head, but heart and soul.

As for images from iraq. I have pics i haven't decided if appropriate or not yet to post on B.N. Brian was deployed 10 months, he and his friends ( fellow PM officers) dealt with the "aftermath" of our initial strikes. Basically, they removed the dead, took air, soil and water samples, and controlled the area so that soldiers would be safe to be deployed into those areas. I doubt americans want to see these pictures. some are so GORY, they'll haunt you (if you have a heart)and death is death. loss of life is horrible no matter which country it happens in. The images of the dead overseas are just as disturbing as 9/11, some images even more so. we took more life than the terrorists, and it doesn't make us any less guilty than they are. we wanted revenge, and in the process we have taken more life than the terrorists did on 9/11.

I guess i wish I could sum things up like BAC, and BBG, but i am not as direct. TOO CHATTY

-rebecca

[Hell's Bells]

BAC,

Regarding your FO comment: Nice. Please don't start comparing your 9/11 "connections" to mine or anyone else's until/unless you know specifically what they are.

Unfortunately it is far more than a "goddamn partisan war cry" to me as well, but I don't feel the need to tell you to FO for suggesting that's all it is to me.

Interesting response. You seem to be more interested in trying to spin this little exchange than you are in taking a look at what you said and deciding whether it was appropriate. You were the one who snarkily told me that I would be one of the people who would forget 9-11 (and you left no doubt as to your intent and to your condescension). I told you to FO. I think that's pretty fair. If you don't want people to tell you to FO, don't be an arse. We're going to just have to live that (or maybe you can play it off as having come out wrong or some other face-saving manuever as I'm sure a full-blown "my bad" isn't forthcoming -- I'd be fine with that) instead of trying to pretend that my response to your comment was somehow inappropriate towards someone of your station.

sounds like you are a little bit sensative about this bac - honestly the fo comment was a little crass and to be honest with you not needed. Personally, i do belive that you kinda stepped over the border on this one. what did el do to deserve that? all he was doing is telling us his personal opinion. if you didnt like it i know there is plenty of ways you can verbalize it other then FO....nice try we all know what it means

[SonomaCat]

sounds like you are a little bit sensative about this bac - honestly the fo comment was a little crass and to be honest with you not needed. Personally, i do belive that you kinda stepped over the border on this one. what did el do to deserve that? all he was doing is telling us his personal opinion. if you didnt like it i know there is plenty of ways you can verbalize it other then FO....nice try we all know what it means

I wasn't trying to hide what it meant, and it summed up my sentiments perfectly at the time. Not spelling it out was purely aesthetic. I may have been a bit harsh, but those two letters expressed the emotion more concisely than anything else. In retrospect, I should have used more letters and words to express the same sentiment in a more articulate manner, and I regret having thrown those letters out there.

And I'm not going to waste my time explaining why that comment was not someone merely expressing an opinion and why I found it extremely insulting on a very personal level. If someone unrelated to the discussion reads it a different way, that's fine. I'm not going to argue about it. Their perceptions are not really any concern of mine. If EG clarifies it and convinces me that I misread what he meant, then I would be more than happy to apologize to him directly for the strong abbreviation.

Frankly, I'm tired of this whole conversation and wish that I wouldn't have gotten involved in the first place.

[El_Gato]

Who're you trying to kid, BAC. You LOVE to get involved in EVERY thread in the "hangout", especially those that I've started and/or commented on.

The bottom line here is that everyone I've discussed this issue with agrees that it's obvious the "mainstream" media is going out of its way to prevent 9/11 images from being broadcast; my intent in offering the question was to see if people WHO AGREED WITH THE PREMISE had any ideas as to why the media was censoring those images.

You're right; you shouldn't have gotten involved in this thread because you don't agree with the premise & I'm not interested in reading WHY you don't. This is aimed at those who DO agree with it in an attempt to determine the rationale behind the censorship. But I know, as soon as you see my name, you are COMPELLED to remind me of your intellectual superiority, your advanced views on society, and the fact that I am simply a REDneck caveman living in the sticks who is woefully misguided on EVERY issue in America today.

As with most social commentaries/questions/thoughts I offer, after BAC gets involved, I'm sorry I even bothered. I'm tempted to post a thread in which I state the sky is blue just to see how he will attempt to intellectually "beat me down".

I was actually about to declare that I was going to cease responding to any comments by BAC since neither of us has EVER been successful in swaying the other but then I thought "Wait! We're the Hannity & Combs (sp?) of the Bobcat Nation! I can't give that up!" (even though I despise Sean Hannity). So, I will keep plugging away with my obviously unintelligent, misguided, back-woods, CONSERVATIVE viewpoints, regardless of BAC...

"Don't give up; don't ever give up" - Jim Valvano

[Hell's Bells]

what BAC, having trouble learning that there is no correct opinion, that there are plenty of others that have opinions that are valid to themselves? honestly i think you should re-read carefully what EG wrote, i had no problem with it and i am courious as 2 why you find it so insulting? its not like he went out and yelled that he hates liberals.

[SonomaCat]

what BAC, having trouble learning that there is no correct opinion, that there are plenty of others that have opinions that are valid to themselves? honestly i think you should re-read carefully what EG wrote, i had no problem with it and i am courious as 2 why you find it so insulting? its not like he went out and yelled that he hates liberals.

It appears that EG is ignoring the only point I was trying to make, and HB doesn't understand why I felt insulted (which is often how it works when it is someone else being insulted), so I guess I will waste my time explaining it.

Let's examine the passage:

Whether you admit it or not (which I'm sure you won't), within a year or 2, you're going to be one of those people who has all but forgotten about 9/11 right up until the point where the Golden Gate bridge is reduced to slag by a suitcase nuke.

To me, this is an accusation that, because of my opinion that we don't need to proactively remind people about 9-11 on a daily basis, that I am so feeble minded (and likely a dose of "liberal" is inferred as well) that I will very soon forget about 9-11 (i.e., the senseless murder of someone close to me), resulting in the another terrorist attack. That seems to strike a bit close to accusing me of caring so little about 9-11 (i.e., the senseless murder of someone close to me) so as to let it waft out of my memory completely, the idea of which is insulting to me.

I wasn't the least bit upset or put off by any of the opinions that EG expressed -- those are all fine (I don't agree with the premise, and I will always get involved with deconstructing a theory that I don't think is true -- that part is interesting conversation to me). It's when he says things like the above that severely question my character (as only someone with a very weak character would ever forget what happened) that I got upset.

If I misread or misinterpreted that passage, then I would be more than happy to be corrected on that (by the person who wrote it) and would adjust my reaction accordingly. If not, then I'm also more than happy to let the whole thing drop and move on. For future reference, just let it be known that I am not in favor of people questioning other people's sincerity of pain and strength of memory relating to 9-11 based on their political worldview. I think that sort of thing is disgusting. Conservatives by no means have a monopoly on their passions or appreciations for the terror of that event.

[WYCAT]

Wow. I just got caught up on this thread this morning and I see another valid topic and discussion has been blindsided and we are again in a "you suck - no - you suck arguement". BAC, I have to agree with Hell's on this one. I read this whole thing from the beginning that you would just disagree with anything that El posts and after a few volley's back and forth you really took it too far with the FO comment. I don't think maybe 3 or so posts from anyone have actually been in response to the original question El posted. That is a shame.

[SonomaCat]

Wow. I just got caught up on this thread this morning and I see another valid topic and discussion has been blindsided and we are again in a "you suck - no - you suck arguement". BAC, I have to agree with Hell's on this one. I read this whole thing from the beginning that you would just disagree with anything that El posts and after a few volley's back and forth you really took it too far with the FO comment. I don't think maybe 3 or so posts from anyone have actually been in response to the original question El posted. That is a shame.

For the record, I don't disagree with El just to disagree. When I disagree with him, it's because I have a different opinion and am trying to express it. I do agree that it is a shame that this thread went this direction. I wish it had not, and I'm sorry that I used those two letters as opposed to calmly (and long windedly) explained why I found that passage quite insulting in my initial post.

[briannell]

read this thread again this morning and I think both involved (bac & el) are a fault for the FO comment. Both are intentionally pushing each others buttons.

el gato tried to imply (from my understanding) that unless it is rehashed in the media 9/11 will be forgotten by the public. BAC expressed that it doesn't have to be discussed on a daily basis in order for it to be remembered. I actually agree with BAC in that I don't want to see those events rehashed in the media, and yes I still remember the horror of that day.

I wonder if el gato would want to see the pics Brian & the other PM officers took of the horrors we caused in Iraq? The images of murdered Iraqis at the hands of our government. Our bombs, our bullets, our soldiers. we are no different in many ways from the terrorists. our government has taken thousands of innocent lives, but from el gato I get the sense that the killing of these innocents is excusable because it was done in the name of 9/11.

what would el gato think of the images brian showed me? there's one of an Iraqi hiding in a faxhole after a shock bomb hit hi town. do you know at first glace it looked like a briefcase of something stuck in the back of the foxhole, than you realize on close inspection "no that's a person!" you can see the fear on his face. my point is that in the name of 9/11 our country murdered innocent people as well. yes iraq was corrupt, but not all iraqis are evil terrorists, and we killed those innocent people just as easily and heartlessly as those bombers did on 9/11.

I don't think either side is right, but all are entitled to their opinions. I do feel for all those individuals that lost loved ones on 9/11. i do not however think their lives hold anymore value than those killed overseas. to me all life has value, and any loss of life by horrific means is unacceptable.

I know the US is the "good guys", but even the US has done terrible things and we have to acknowledge that too. if you are going to argue how bad the terrorist are you need to look at why they feel this way towards our country.

-rebecca

PS - BAC, I'm so sorry for your personal loss due to the 9/11 attacks. and for the record Brian lost people he knew and worked with at the Pentagon, and the overseas images he saw of our bombings didn't make him feel vindicated in any way. it doesn't take away your loss causing harm to someone else.

[Ponycat]

So is telling someone to FO now appropriate for this site or just for moderators.

[SonomaCat]

So is telling someone to FO now appropriate for this site or just for moderators.

It wasn't appropriate for me to have used it, and I would hope that others wouldn't use it in the future. I have apologized for that, and I humbly do so once again now. Sorry.

[El_Gato]

rebecca,

I HAVE seen NUMEROUS photos of all kinds of activity in Iraq, the good and the bad. My nephew was there and at least a dozen customers/friends/acquaintances I have RIGHT HERE IN PODUNK MONTANA were there as well. One of my closest friends is there now, working as a civilian contractor.

I only want to offer you a simple point: WE DIDN'T GO TO IRAQ TO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE. Have innocent people died because of our invasion? Yes; unfortunately in war, innocent people die. Are the majority of Iraqis better off now (or soon) than when Saddam was in power? According to those I talk to who have been there, the answer is yes as well.

...and we killed those innocent people just as easily and heartlessly as those bombers did on 9/11...

The terrorists developed & implemented a plan SPECIFICALLY TO KILL INNOCENT AMERICANS. The fact that you try to make a comparison to what we are doing in defense of our nation & our freedom is appalling to me, especially considering that your husband is directly involved in the conflict. Do you really believe that ANY of our soldiers has INTENTIONALLY killed Iraqis they knew were innocent? I know I'm generally cynical but there's no way I believe that has happened.

As to the original point of this thread, the "accusation" I made that BAC would "forget" 9/11 has been taken a bit too literally, and yes, I should have been more precise. After thinking about it and the response I got from it, what I truly intended to convey with those comments is that if, in a year or 2, we were no longer fighting the war against terrorists, that would be fine & dandy with BAC and those who share his sentiments. Will BAC or anyone truly forget the EVENTS of 9/11? Obviously none of us will; but my point is that I fear that some (most?) people will eventually have no committment to militarily ensure that such an event never happens again and BAC strikes me as one of those people.

I'm sorry if my opinion offends some of you, but I have no problem with our emotions being prodded occasionally so that our focus on the war on terrorists is not blurred...

[SonomaCat]

As to the original point of this thread, the "accusation" I made that BAC would "forget" 9/11 has been taken a bit too literally, and yes, I should have been more precise. After thinking about it and the response I got from it, what I truly intended to convey with those comments is that if, in a year or 2, we were no longer fighting the war against terrorists, that would be fine & dandy with BAC and those who share his sentiments. Will BAC or anyone truly forget the EVENTS of 9/11? Obviously none of us will; but my point is that I fear that some (most?) people will eventually have no committment to militarily ensure that such an event never happens again and BAC strikes me as one of those people.

Thank you for your clarification. I have no problem with your statement as you have now explained it, and I'm sorry for tossing out the abbreviated Brit slang.

However, let me assure you that I am no less committed to the idea of every terrorist on this earth being destroyed than you are. I'm not sure what would give you any indication otherwise as I have always been extremely adament on that point since the moment 9-11 happened.

I fear that you are confusing my lack of enthusiasm for the Bush administration with a support/acceptance of terrorism. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, I wish we were devoting more resources to fighting terrorism as opposed to less.

I live in a very blue area, and I assume that is the demographic that you might feel is inherently soft on terrorism (and presumably why you included me specifically as a person who you think will soon not care about stopping terrorism). Let me assure you that nobody I know or I have talked to is soft on that topic. That is a myth that I fear is being promoted by many in the conservative media for political purposes. There is no truth whatsoever to such a myth.

Knowing that, I came to my conclusion that we don't need to be reminded of 9-11 solely for anti-terrorism rallying purposes. Everybody is very aware of the threats of terrorism, especially those of us who live in the areas that would most likely be struck by terrorists.

[El_Gato]

Thanks, BAC.

I'm glad we are on the same side when it comes to winning this war. My views that you might be "soft" on terrorism stem from many things, but overall in that I don't recall ever actually reading your support for the war on terrorists (NOT the war in Iraq; I know your feelings on that).

Anyway, I'm glad to see that you ARE committed to winning this war, as we ALL should be. We don't (and won't) always have to agree with how the "experts" go about actually achieving victory (ie invading Iraq) but we CANNOT allow those disagreements to lessen our resolve to eliminating global terrorism.

[SonomaCat]

I have actually stated in many posts that I fully support the operations in Afghanistan (and wish they were larger, actually), and that I hope we have bad, bad men doing bad, bad things secretly to terrorist cells all over the world (the invisible war on terrorism).

So yes, we're on the same side of this argument. No worries.

[grizbeer]

However, let me assure you that I am no less committed to the idea of every terrorist on this earth being destroyed than you are. I'm not sure what would give you any indication otherwise

Probably because every time you cite an "objective" source it comes from Slate. just kidding.

[BobCatFan]

It sounds like Michael Savage is just continuing his trend of constantly trying to conjure up liberal-pinko-dope-smoker mainstream media conspiracy theories.

.

I thought this was a true statement.

[Bleedinbluengold]

Just a thought: The War on terrorism is a war of attrition - perhaps analogous to the Cold War. At some point - maybe 20 years - I think people, in general, will get very tired of either blowing themselves up, or just as simply, mass murdering people using other types bombs. I think such a shift in human consciousness might go down in history - but I'm an optomist.

[iaafan]

It would be nice if the right could figure out that the left is just as committed to winning the war on terror. There may be different courses of action to getting that done. For some reason they have it their heads that everyone on the left wants to just bag it and run to Canada.