The Pub Discussion Board

Eric Storm · 2012-09-12 22:17:59

Okay, first off, let me say this: I'm about to piss someone off. Probably several someones, and probably quite nastily. That is not my intent, and I apologize for it now. I simply need to get what I'm about to say, off my chest.

Yesterday marked the 11th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and Flight 93. Nearly 3000 people died, because some insane madmen who thought that they represented Islam simply couldn't handle a country so secularly based as our own.

In full disclosure, I didn't know anyone who died that day. My sister, a volunteer firefighter in Western New York state, did go to the site to help out, but, if I recall correctly, wasn't involved in the search & recovery operation directly. So, you would be fully justified in pointing out that I have no strong emotional trauma from the events.

Even so...

11 years later, we are still mourning the dead. The country as a whole is still grieving. There are still people who, if you attempt to make some kind of joke, or even a light-hearted statement about that day, will proclaim it to be "too early".

After 11 years? Really?

I have lost people in my life. Both my parents are deceased, and all of my grandparents. I know the loss that comes from the death of a loved one... but sanity demands that there are limits to how much grieving is a good thing.

If you are still mourning a loved one lost on that day, I am sorry. I feel for you. But I say this to you: It is time for you to let go of the loss, the pain, and the anguish. Honor their memory by getting on with your life. I am sure that they would not want you to be clinging to this event, so long after it has happened. Every day that you cannot move on from this event is another day that the terrorists have beaten you. Every year that America makes a production out of this anniversary is another year that the terrorists have beaten all of us.

Yesterday, two news outlets were nearly excoriated for daring to not fall all over themselves for this anniversary. The New York Times didn't put coverage of the memorial services on its front page, and NBC's Today Show did not take a moment of silence at 8:46am. My question is... how long do we keep this up? In 2100 AD, are we STILL going to be having moments of silence? Where is the line? Just how much power are we going to give these damned filthy terrorists to control our lives? Bad enough that we implemented a whole slew of security protocols because of them (and are those security protocols making us substantially safer? Probably not...), but we have even given them a whole day out of every year where we proclaim that they so gravely hurt us that we must have a memorial for the dead not just once, but every single year since it happened.

When they started talking about rebuilding the world trade center, I was of the belief that it should have been rebuilt exactly as it had been before... only one floor taller. That would have been the ultimate "FUCK YOU!" to the terrorists. You didn't make us rearrange everything we do. You inconvenienced us, and that is all. I am still of the opinion that this was the right thing to do. Instead, we have built new, completely redesigned buildings, which, while very pretty, will not be nearly as useful as the twin towers were. Instead of having a dignified memorial plaque on the ground floors of the "new" twin towers, what we have is a massive memorial area that is going to cost $60 million a year to operate. That is the highest cost of any park under the National Parks Service control. And, if the revenues don't come in for the park, guess who'll be paying the operating costs? That's right: we will. We very well may have allowed the terrorists to spend our money in perpetuity. What were we thinking???

For the life of me, I cannot figure out why this event is so entrenched. Yes, it was a horrible disaster. But was it really SO MUCH WORSE than other disasters, that it deserves this level of continual remembrance? Is it the number of people who died? I can't imagine that's the case. Nearly 2000 people died in Hurricane Katrina, and I'm willing to bet that most people can't even recall the date on which that happened. Somewhere around a quarter MILLION people died in the Christmas Indian Ocean Tsunami, and I'm willing to bet most of you can't even recall the YEAR in which that happened. Yet, the attack on the WTC is so entrenched, we named it after the day on which it happened. It has become very much a Holy Day for many Americans.

And why? Why are we giving away so much power to extremists? Why are we letting them continue to hurt us over this one event? Understand: They took away the 3000 people. We GAVE AWAY the next eleven years.

Let's not give them any more of our lives. I'm not saying we need to forget what happened that day. I'm just saying that we need to not treat it like a sacred event. Until the time comes when September 11 of the year is just another day on the calendar for the vast majority of us, the terrorists are still winning.

Respectfully,
Eric Storm

Jefferson · 2012-09-13 00:32:23

First off, we still recognize December the seventh of every year as Pearl Harbor day. June the sixth is still known as D-Day. It has been 71 and 68 years, respectively, since those two events occurred. The sunken USS Arizona continues to serve as memorial to the attack on Pearl Harbor and those who died that day, including the 1,000 plus sailors who are permanently entombed within the Arizona.

Second, no, we don't take a moment of silence on national TV for the two events I listed above but a number of things are different between 9/11/01 and Pearl Harbor. Before we get into it, about the same number of people died in both attacks. (Pearl Harbor saw 2,402 military and 57 civilians killed, while 2,996 died on 9/11/01, those numbers taken from Wikipedia.) I don't think anyone who comes to this site regularly was around during the Pearl Harbor attack or the years that immediately followed. I doubt any of us ever had the wherewithal to ask a parent, grandparent or great grandparent who may have been there for information on how many years afterwards were there tributes to those who died during the Pearl Harbor attacks so we don't know if, or for how long, those tributes may have lasted.

There are two other differences that you should consider also.

The first, is that America has grown fat, apathetic and lazy. Why? Because we sit around a TV all day. I was lucky, or maybe unlucky enough, to not be working on September 11th, 2001. I sat in front of the TV, watching the news most of the day, but as Eric and others here know, I am a news junkie, so I may not be average. The attack on Pearl Harbor was not broadcast live and in color for the entire country, the entire world, to see. Unlike the attack on the World Trade Center. Whether this is a good or a bad thing is off-topic.

In that day, late 1941, with that technology, it probably took an hour or more, after the attacks ended, for the reports of the attack to make it onto radios across the country. It would have been days later before people saw still photos of the death and devastation at Pearl Harbor in Time magazine and probably would have been weeks later before they saw video footage of it in a newsreel at their local movie theater. Americans watched, live, as the towers fell on 9/11. I'm pretty sure that even watching the events of 9/11 on TV would have a much bigger impact on people than listening to a news report on the radio, seeing pictures a few days later and watching a few moments of film a week or so after the Pearl Harbor attack.

The second thing that should be considered is that we have resolution, we have closure, for the attack on Pearl Harbor. We fought and won a war against Japan in retribution for the Pearl harbor attack. If that wasn't enough, we dropped the first two nuclear weapons ever created on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a result of those attacks. 71,000 plus Japanese soldiers, sailors, airmen and civilians died during World War 2. The war ended.

While we have succeeded in accomplishing some very important goals during what President Bush labeled "the War on Terror," we have attacked the nations of Afghanistan and Iraq. We kicked the Taliban out of Kabul, Afghanistan, scattered their leaders and supporters across Afghanistan and Pakistan, we took out Al Qaida's training camps in Afghanistan, we put Al Qaida's leaders on the run, have upset their apple cart all over place, cutting their communications, their funding and such, and have killed or captured, dozens, if not hundreds, of their leaders and operatives, leading up to the eventual killing of Al Qaida's leader, Osama Bin Laden. We have fought others around the world, in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Indonesia to name a few but, we all know, the war goes on. They are still out there. Just yesterday, 9/11/12, our embassies in Egypt and Libya were attacked (while it was originally believed these were grass roots protests because of some silly movie about the prophet Mohammed, as it turns, the protest in Egypt had been announced back on Aug. 31. Not a grass roots protest. These were planned.) Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans died in the attack on the embassy in Libya. The war goes on. Every couple of months, we hear of another attack, in Times Square, on a plane landing in Detroit, on a military base in Texas, of some radicalized Muslim trying to attack and kill American citizens. While we may be winning the war, unlike World War 2, we have not won the war, and, short of genocide, I fear we may never win this war.

And last, the fact that this rant of yours appeared on September the twelfth, and the fact that Annie mentioned to me that LAoW said something similar on her Facebook page only yesterday, tells me something inspired this rant - maybe a random comment in the grocery store got you a dirty look, maybe listening to someone like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity rant and rave about how we don't show enough respect or maybe it was the Good Morning, America thing - but something inspired it. My guess is whatever it was that inspired this is temporary. If you made a joke about 9/11 and got a dirty look in the grocery store the other day, put it down to bad timing rather than the American people being too sensitive. If you had made the same joke two months ago, or a month from now, nobody would have thought a thing of it.

Our sensitivity to all things 9/11 becomes more apparent the closer we are to the anniversary.

Last edited by Jefferson (2012-09-13 00:39:38)

Eric Storm · 2012-09-13 03:16:13

Jefferson, don't try psychoanalyzing me. You weren't even close.

What "inspired" this rant, as you put it, was the lambasting of the New York Times (not a paper of which I am fond, as I'm sure you're aware) for not putting the 11th anniversary memorial services on the front page, and the bitching-out that NBC (another news outlet I have no love for) got for lacking a moment of silence. I don't tell jokes about those events, because I KNOW what the response will be, and no, the sensitivity really doesn't go up much around this time of year.

Your claims that we are more entrenched with this event is due to the media coverage doesn't wash. We watched Katrina obliterate New Orleans "live", too. We saw the aftermath of the Japanese nuclear disaster "live". We saw the Christmas Tsunami "live". None of these events had anywhere near the impact that the attack on the World Trade Center did, despite killing similar numbers, or far more people... AND taking a lot longer to transpire from start to finish.

You said what needed to be said about D-Day AND Pearl Harbor: Virtually no one talks about them.

Ultimately, you have failed to address the actual issue, and the central point of my post: What we are doing here is not healthy for us. It's not healthy as individuals, and it's not healthy for us as a nation.

Eric Storm

LAoW · 2012-09-13 04:00:28

And yes, Jefferson, I did mention it. Eric and I speak almost every night about random topics. We had the discussion and agree that people shouldn't forget, but should move on with their lives and quit mourning. As Eric says and I agree, it's not healthy for people to continually mourn. People need to move on.

Jefferson · 2012-09-13 04:34:50

I'm not sure what it is you think is "unhealthy" about America remembering and memorializing the events of 9/11.

No, of course we don't talk about Pearl Harbor anymore, mostly, because none of us lived through it. All the scars of Pearl Harbor have been cleaned up and built over. Even the USS Arizona has become just one more sight to add to the itinerary when you go visit Hawaii. My point was that I bet in 1953 or so, twelve years after Pearl Harbor, I bet they still remembered it, they still discussed it, they still mourned the loss of life there much as we mourn the loss of life at the World Trade Center on 9/11. I'm not saying it should be on the front page of the rag that is the New York Times these days, or that the moment of silence must be aired on NBC. But I think it should be remembered. Not just because we lost nearly 3,000 people that day but because of what it represents.

Seeing the mast of the sunken USS Arizona sticking up out of the water must have been a somber event as warships were sailing in and out of Pearl during the heyday of World War II. It would have made those sailors think of what could happen to them. One mistake, one lucky strike by a Japanese submarine, surface vessel or airplane could send the ship that sailor was standing on to the bottom of the ocean and there was a real possibility that that sailor would go down with his ship. At the same time, it must have been motivating. "Remember the Arizona!" It gave them a cause, a just cause at that. It gave them something to fight for and it gave the people back home something to keep them going. It gave them a reason for the sugar rationing, the rubber rationing and all the rest of the shit they had to put up with while the war continued elsewhere. The Arizona was why they kept fighting.

As I said in my previous post, the war on terror continues. After Pearl Harbor, men flooded into military recruiting stations and volunteered for service. After 9/11, things weren't quite so dramatic but due to the fact that we are fighting a significantly smaller war and that our war fighting skills and technologies have gotten so much better in the last 70 years, we don't need millions and millions of men to fight this war. But those two towers still represent what we are fighting for and the hole in the ground, that burned piece of field in Pennsylvania still represents why families are sending their young sons and daughters overseas to fight in this seemingly never ending war.

As for Katrina, the Christmas Tsunami and the Japanese earthquake these were natural disasters. (I don't include the nuclear disaster because it was caused by the earthquake.) There is no enemy to fight. Only a fool declares war on Mother Nature. There's also the fact that, except for Katrina, none of these events occurred inside the United States. It's not something we should be proud of but most Americans are nationalistic. For the most part, we, the people, largely ignore events that occur outside of our borders unless they somehow directly affect us. The true definition of The Ugly American.

You say it's unhealthy. I say what's unhealthy about it? The country is moving forward. While we may remember 9/11, while we may still mourn the loss of life, the loss of some of our freedoms, the loss of 6,000 plus young Americans overseas, we are still going. People still go to work, people still feed their families, they still go to the movies and they still watch "Two Broke Girls" on TV. We aren't sitting idle, crying into our soup and feeling sorry for ourselves. What, exactly, do you find unhealthy about it?

Jefferson · 2012-09-13 04:43:37

LAoW, do you know people who sit in their house, afraid to go out because they are afraid of the big, bad, nasty terrorists?

Do you know someone, personally, who sits and cries, day after day, in mourning or fear of another 9/11 occurring?

We talk about it. More so, as the anniversary gets closer.

Everyone I know, they are getting on with their lives even if they do remember and mourn for what happened on 9/11.

My brother died more than 20 years ago due to complications from diabetes. I still miss Randy. He was my older brother. He's a large part of the reason I am who I am. He was a Young Republican in high school. He was a volunteer for John McCain when he first won his Senate seat. He's probably a large part of the reason I'm a comic book geek and a Star Trek fan. I miss him, I mourn his loss but, except for the day he died, and the day after, his passing has not stopped me from moving on with my life. You can mourn the loss of a life, or lives, you can remember what was while still moving forward with your life. I have no idea where you two got this idea that people couldn't.

The media makes a much bigger deal of everything. Everything is exaggerated, glorified, horrified or fibbed when it comes to the news. Go to the grocery store, go to Wal-Mart and see if you find people wandering around, discussing 9/11, dwelling on it. I'm betting you won't find many.

Eric Storm · 2012-09-13 06:14:13

Jefferson... any country full of people who talk about boycotts over not putting the memorial service on the front page? They aren't "moving on". If you can't understand how that attitude is unhealthy... Then I don't think I can explain it to you. Perhaps a psychologist could.

What you refer to, when you talk of your brother, is not "mourning". It is simply remembering wistfully. Mourning, or grief, if you prefer, is a process. And in the end of the process, you stop mourning. That has nothing to do with forgetting, it simply has to do with no longer letting the loss rule your thoughts and emotions where that person or event is concerned. If we, as a country, cannot stomach the notion of a media outlet not making this the #1 story of the day... then we are still in mourning, and we have not moved on.

Most sudden deaths do not allow for closure, as this event did not allow for closure. That doesn't lessen the need to complete the stages of grief, the last of which is acceptance, and moving on. What I've seen clearly says that people have NOT moved on. And that, as any psychologist or psychiatrist will tell you, IS unhealthy.

I understand that you don't see my point of view on this. I imagine that a lot of people won't, which is why I apologized before I even started speaking on-point. However, your insistence that we have moved on doesn't convince me so long as I see what I saw on Tuesday.

Eric Storm

Jefferson · 2012-09-13 06:21:17

What you saw on Tuesday, people yelling and screaming that the Times didn't put the anniversary on the front page and that GMA didn't air the moment of silence was a very loud and very vocal minority. Most people, pay little attention to the news anyway. Those who do, like me, ignore it.

It was the squeaky wheel getting the oil. It means nothing. It's a show.

Eric Storm · 2012-09-13 07:02:57

I'm glad you think so. I disagree. But I'm not going to bother discussing it further, since obviously we simply do not see eye to eye on this issue.

Eric Storm

LAoW · 2012-09-13 19:52:58

Jefferson, personally I think you're not understanding what we mean. It's not easy to convey emotional meaning across the computer. We're not talking about those who celebrate the life and memory of lost ones. That is fine. But those who do sit and cry every day still because of someone lost after so many years. That is not healthy. I lost my grandmother many years ago. It took me about two years before I could sit and think about her without crying. Now I remember how she'd say my name "Shelby Jean..." and other things that make me smile. That is what we mean by moving on. I miss her, sure. But I don't sit around and mope that my grandma is gone. We're not saying don't have a memorial. We're not saying don't take a minute to remember them on that day, but quit dwelling on HOW they died and dwell more on HOW they LIVED. Make sense?

Jefferson · 2012-09-13 23:03:42

"But those who do sit and cry every day still because of someone lost after so many years. That is not healthy."

I agree, wholeheartedly. But I don't see that happening. As I said in my previous posts, I don't know anyone who does that. There are people who lost a loved one, a spouse, a parent or a child in the towers, and they still break up when they go to talk about that loved one, especially if they're talking about 9/11, the day their loved one died, and not just discussing some random memory of a dead loved one, but on the whole, I don't see people sitting around crying and mourning for a lost loved one day after day after day. I sincerely hope that if there are people out there who do that, I really hope their family intervenes and gets that person into counseling or maybe even admitted for long term psychiatric care, they obviously need it desperately.

I'd say most people have moved on from that stage thought. Those who lost a spouse, are probably dating again, if not already remarried. Yes, groups come together and mourn the loved ones they lost in a shared tragedy but I wouldn't count that as not "getting on with their life." Even if this support group meets once a week in the basement of some church somewhere, the rest of the time these people are taking care of their families, going to work, doing their jobs, eating, drinking, going to the movies and watching Survivor. They get on TV and start talking about 9/11, yes, they cry. And ten minutes after the cameras go off, they wipe their tears away, blow their nose and drive home to their spouse, job and children... in other words, they get on with their life.

Just because you see someone crying and upset on TV doesn't mean that's how they are on most days. Most days, these people lead normal, average everyday lives, loving their spouse, raising their children and doing their job.

As for dwelling on how they lived, instead of how they died, I imagine most of the time, after 11 years, the dead loved one is just a memory in back of their mind, kind of like your grandmother is for you, and my brother is for me, but when someone asks them to go on TV, or on the radio, or onto a stage to discuss 9/11 and the loved one they lost... Should they get up there and talk about the motorcycle their loved one finished building two short months before 9/11? It might be a sad story, but it's not what they are there to discuss. It would be like me being asked to talk about Randy's time with the John McCain campaign and all I can talk about is the day he died. It may be a good story but it's not the information they want to hear.

LAoW · 2012-09-14 21:31:23

And Jefferson, you should change your little saying there at the bottom. Positive change. Cause it could be worse! 3dwink

The Pub Discussion Board

#1 2012-09-12 22:17:59

Isn't it time to let go?

#2 2012-09-13 00:32:23

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#3 2012-09-13 03:16:13

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#4 2012-09-13 04:00:28

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#5 2012-09-13 04:34:50

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#6 2012-09-13 04:43:37

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#7 2012-09-13 06:14:13

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#8 2012-09-13 06:21:17

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#9 2012-09-13 07:02:57

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#10 2012-09-13 19:52:58

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#11 2012-09-13 23:03:42

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

#12 2012-09-14 21:31:23

Re: Isn't it time to let go?

Board footer