Here's a hearty 9-11 F-You, you smarmy, condescending piece of crap!

[astro]

From the L.A. Times editorial section for 9/11/2002 -

Can a great power wounded learn to treat others more gently? " by By Pico Iyer

Pico Iyer is the author, most recently, of “The Global Soul” (Vintage, 2001) and, coming this winter, “Abandon,” a novel about California, Islam and the dialogue between them

Today is the first day when Sept. 11 no longer has to signify a particular traumatic incident; it can refer now to a new day, Sept. 11, 2002. The United States will always be, to some extent, imprisoned by its power. But if it can show the world that it can be humble and ready to change, some good may yet come of all it has suffered. Perhaps the best thing we can learn from older nations–Vietnam, say, or Japan–is that the most useful response to loss is to start looking beyond our wounds and toward how we can avoid hurting others, and getting hurt, again.

Yes… we Americans are such arrogant brutes compared to all the kinder, gentler more morally upright countries. If only we were a better, more sensitive country like maybe Saudi Arabia, or possibly Iraq, or Iran or Afghanistan, or that paragon of peaceful inter-cultural understanding your native India, then maybe the freedom fighters of al-Qa’ida would not have had to take such stern measures with us.

Yes, please forgive us you condescending, arrogant little fuck. Thanks for the heads up on 9-11 of our moral failings as a nation and the caution to be more mature and sensitive to the hurt feelings of those whom we may offend by not being the extra careful, tiptoeing, curtseying, self apologetic superpower that we should be and could be, if only we had the moral courage and will.

[Beagle]

This blind date may not go so well.

AMONG THE PATRIOTIC lesson plans for 9-11 was one proposed by the National Council for Social Studies, which recommends a short story titled “My Name is Osama.” Calculatedly inciting hatred toward white American boys, the story is about a nasty little boy, “Todd,” who taunts an Iraqi immigrant named “Osama.”

This is the lesson to commemorate the biggest hate crime in history – committed by someone named “Osama” against people with names like “Todd.” How about a 1942 lesson plan titled “My name is Adolf”? Might the 9-11 lesson plan inquire into what little “Osama” thinks about the terrorist attack? May we ask? (Question from the actual lesson plan: “Why, do you think, did Osama’s family leave Iraq?” Incorrect answer: Because his father wanted to go to flight school in America.)

Since the horrific attack by practitioners of the “Religion of Peace,” there have been a slew of hate crimes – committed by Muslims against Americans. Hesham Mohamed Hadayet murdered two and wounded many more at Los Angeles International Airport. Suleyman al-Faris, aka “John Walker Lindh,” joined an attack in Afghanistan that left Michael Spann dead. Abdel Rahim, aka “Richard Reid,” tried but failed to murder a plane-load of people on an American Airlines jet headed to Miami.
…[snip]…
Students from the Al Noor School were interviewed again a few weeks ago, this time by CBS’ “60 Minutes.” The students instantly and enthusiastically agreed with the proposition that a “Muslim who becomes a suicide bomber goes to Paradise for that action.” “Definitely,” one student said, calling a female suicide bomber “very brave.”

“Do you believe they are martyrs? Holy martyrs?” Again, without hesitation, the students affirmed: “Yes” and “of course.”

As to whether suicide bombers would go to Paradise, the students said they earnestly hoped so. “I mean, they’re doing it for a good cause,” one boy explained. “I pray that they go to Paradise,” another said. Not only that, but one student said, “I think we’d all probably do the same.” …[snip]…

No dessert. Check Please!

[Silentgoldfish]

Heh. She got fired.

[Gary_Kumquat]

Erm, perhaps I’m being dumb, but I don’t actually see anything that offensive in his article. Nowhere does the author compare the US to any of the nations you mention. He mentions two nations who’ve both been at war with the US but now enjoy good relations. Is this such a horrible goal to hope for?

[xenophon41]

Congratulations, astro!

You’re this week’s winner of the coveted Dubya Platinum Pretzel Prize for Moral Clarity! Your classic display of black and white thinking merited our special attention both for its timeliness and for the effortless way in which indignation was maintained throughout your criticism while avoiding any actual refutation.

We applaud your brilliant effort, and award you this commemorative Pres. George W. Bush fountain pen, Certificate of Compassionism, and an autographed picture of the Commander in Chief defending our freedom aboard Air Force One on the day of the attacks.

Enjoy your recognition, and remember: If they’re not with us, they’re against us!

[jjimm]

astro: fulfilling stereotypes so we don’t have to.

[astro]

*Originally posted by Gary Kumquat *
**Erm, perhaps I’m being dumb, but I don’t actually see anything that offensive in his article. Nowhere does the author compare the US to any of the nations you mention. He mentions two nations who’ve both been at war with the US but now enjoy good relations. Is this such a horrible goal to hope for? **

The offensive part is the fairly direct implication that we got what we deserved at the hands al-Qa’ida because of our insensitivity to the delicate sensibilities of Islam. More aggravating still is the smug certitude that this is happening because we are a young, bumbling nation without the maturity and wisdom to deal with our role as a superpower.

I look to world history for an example of a comparable superpower that was more sensitive and more careful than the US has tried (and sometimes failed) to be over the past 50 years and not many paragons of superpower sensitivity and gentleness are coming to mind, although possibly a more historically astute doper could enlighten me on this issue. As the world’s single remaining true superpower (at this point) we sit at the center of a complex web of relationships and obligations that are not always going to be resolved to the satisfaction of everyone.

Many people abroad seem to feel that U.S. leaders are much less sophisticated and worldly than the leaders of much smaller places, while the American people (whom everyone seems to like) are less interested, at times, in learning about the world than in changing it. Certainly the world knows more about us than we know about it.

It’s easy for a nation or government (or author) to play the detached wise man if your interests are not immediately at stake, but as a superpower our interests are engaged across the globe due to our economic reach and the interlocking treaties and agreements and understandings we have worldwide.

And finally as the capper of his 9-11 love note to the US -

For many around the world, I suspect, the shock of the attacks is gradually being eroded by the image of Washington’s response, which allows them to say: “They’re doing what they always do. Taking their frustrations out on the poor.”

The world can think what it likes about our campaign to hunt down and punish the righteous army of al-Qa’ida for killing 3,000 of our civilian citizens in cold blood, but the notion that this should give us pause for us to reflect on our bumbling brutality, because, well…we might be displeasing the sensibilities of someone, somewhere with this effort is simply more than I swallow along with my coffee on 9/11/2002.

[Jonathan_Chance]

I’m just stunned at how quickly Coulter invoked Godwin’s Law there. That’s true speed!

[jjimm]

fairly direct implication that we got what we deserved

What nonsense.

Nobody deserves that. And nobody said it.

[Estilicon]

[quote]
For many around the world, I suspect, the shock of the attacks is gradually being eroded by the image of Washington’s response, which allows them to say: “They’re doing what they always do. Taking their frustrations out on the poor.”

The world can think what it likes about our campaign to hunt down and punish the righteous army of al-Qa’ida for killing 3,000 of our civilian citizens in cold blood, but the notion that this should give us pause for us to reflect on our bumbling brutality, because, well…we might be displeasing the sensibilities of someone, somewhere with this effort is simply more than I swallow along with my coffee on 9/11/2002.

[quote]

Well Astro being a part of the rest of the world I have to say that many around the world, not only in Saudi Arabia but also in your allies countries don’t like what your goverment is doing. Suddenly Irak a country that is more opposed to fundamentalism than the U.S. (remember, when it served your interest Osama was a good guy… as was Saddam) is being conected with those kind of organazations. We hear in our media that the probable invasion to Irak has little to do with terrorism and a lot to do with economy and politics. Perhaps we are wrong but we have seen nothing in Bush arrogant handling of this crisis to convince us otherwise.

[astro]

*Originally posted by jjimm *
**What nonsense.

Nobody deserves that. And nobody said it. **

Note to jjimm - “deserved” operationally (not morally) in the sense that our brutal, insensitive superpower blunderings and hurtful actions led logically us “getting hurt” on 9-11-01.

But if it can show the world that it can be humble and ready to change, some good may yet come of all it has suffered. Perhaps the best thing we can learn from older nations–Vietnam, say, or Japan–is that the most useful response to loss is to start looking beyond our wounds and toward how we can avoid hurting others, and getting hurt, again.

So reading comprehension wise, you don’t consider this a statement implying an operational linkage between our superpower bumbling and the smackdown that we got on 9-11, and that this statement does not imply that if only we could change our brutal ways to be more sensitive and less “hurtful” to the sensibilities of other cultures that none of this would have happened?

[Coldfire]

Note to astro: it is possible to come to the conclusion that there very well may be a causal relationship between US foreign policy during the last 10 years, and heightened animosity towards the US from Muslim terrorists.

Doesn’t mean that the US deserved it. I’ll give you one thing: the timing of the article is poor, to say the least.

[astro]

*Originally posted by Coldfire *
**Note to astro: it is possible to come to the conclusion that there very well may be a causal relationship between US foreign policy during the last 10 years, and heightened animosity towards the US from Muslim terrorists.

Doesn’t mean that the US deserved it. I’ll give you one thing: the timing of the article is poor, to say the least. **

And in the end I suppose that’s really what I’m most pissed off about. There are times and places for lectures on the failings of the US to be as equisitively sensitive as we could be in all situations to keep other people from getting mad at us, but the morning of 9-11 just did not seem to be the time or place to entertian this perspective.

[armedmonkey]

The United States will always be, to some extent, imprisoned by its power. But if it can show the world that it can be humble and ready to change, some good may yet come of all it has suffered. Perhaps the best thing we can learn from older nations–Vietnam, say, or Japan–is that the most useful response to loss is to start looking beyond our wounds and toward how we can avoid hurting others, and getting hurt, again.

I don’t see why any of you would be defending this asshole. The US was the victim of 9-11 and this guy is implying that the victim is at fault. Sure, he never says it in so many words, but allow me a short parody to illustrate:

The attractive woman will always be, to some extent, imprisoned by her own beauty. But if she can show the world that she can be humble and ready to change, some good may yet come of her rape. Perhaps the best thing she can learn from other women is that the most useful response to rape is to start looking beyond her wounds and toward how she can avoid being a bitch, and getting raped, again

He’s blaming the victim on the anniversary of the crime. He’s an ass.

[tiny_ham]

I’m still really from the Coulter column.

Am I happy…or sad that the Dopers have exposed me to such a fucking wacko?

I’ll get back to you.

[Jackmannii]

*Originally posted by Estilicon *
**We hear in our media that the probable invasion to Irak has little to do with terrorism and a lot to do with economy and politics. Perhaps we are wrong but we have seen nothing in Bush arrogant handling of this crisis to convince us otherwise. **

You can make a case that the Bush Administration has been arrogant in its approach to possible military action against Iraq, and that such action has not been sufficiently justified to this point.

But suggesting that “economy and politics” is the driving force behind U.S. policy towards Iraq rather than the threat of terrorism, signifies that your media need vast improvement, i.e. something approaching sober, honest analysis.

[xenophon41]

[related hijack]

Y’know, I’m really getting SICK of the insulting and inapt rape analogy. Let’s get this straight, people: America wasn’t “raped” on 9/11.

Rape is a crime which requires the victim to have had their ability to resist curtailed in some manner by the perpetrator; rapists express their rage through humiliation and control of the victim. America on 9/11 was neither controlled nor humiliated by the attackers; if any individual crime is comparable to those attacks, then you could say we were assaulted.

And if one wants to draw an analogy to a criminal assault, one had better portray the victim America as the biggest, baddest, loudest and most opinionated fucker on the street, because that’s what we are. And most of the time, we’re right. But we look like a big whiny fool when we get all sniffly at the idea that slapping the other folks on the street around might not be the best reaction when some thug chucks a brick at us.

We’re the big kid with the aspirations to moral leadership; sticking out our lower lip and blubbering “But we’re the victim here, boo hoo” doesn’t garner us either the respect we deserve or the cooperation we demand.

As an American, I refuse to play international victim by acting as if nobody’s got a right to be pissed off at us. I’d rather we walked more softly and used our big stick more selectively. Because despite the terrorists who hate us, we are responsible for our own actions. And unlike those terrorists, we’re both competent enough and morally cognizant enough to live up to our responsibilities.

Screw those repugnant assholes; America’s nobody’s bitch. But we should be nobody’s bully, either.

[/hijack]

[SinisterDan]

In regards to the OP, the quoted comparisons between the US, Japan and Vietnam are not at all apt - a tenth grade history book would show us this.
This is yet another example of the ‘blame America’ game - and don’t kid yourselves, just because it isn’t being said overtly doesn’t mean the intent isn’t there.
The only time no one blames America is when the US is saving their ass.

[Captain_Amazing]

I still laughed at this:

(Question from the actual lesson plan: “Why, do you think, did Osama’s family leave Iraq?” Incorrect answer: Because his father wanted to go to flight school in America.)

[armedmonkey]

Xenophon, OK, maybe your right that rape isn’t such a great analogy, but the author is still blaming the victim. It’s true that the victim is the baddest guy on the block, but that does not mean he wasn’t wronged.

gary, xeno, jjim, let me put forth a more apt analogy. Would you still view the author as kindly if on the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing he wrote

But if the federal government can show the splinter groups that it can be humble and ready to change, some good may yet come of all it has suffered. Perhaps the best thing we can learn is that the most useful response to loss is to start looking beyond our wounds and toward how we can avoid hurting people like Timothy McVeigh, and getting hurt, again.

Are y’all beginning to get the picture?