Of course, the terrorist attacks on 9/11 were horrible, and many people suffered dearly as the result. Since that time, however, I have been increasingly dismayed at the tendency for governmental entities, businesses, as well as individuals to cite 9/11 as justification for various actions which are - at best - only tenuously related to either the events of 9/11 or international terrorism in general.
Most obvious are federal government actions including our 2 most recent wars, the Patriot Act, CAPPS, the creation of the DHS, to name but a few. The Bush administration hollered “9/11” so much that the president recently felt he needed to clarify that Iraq was not behind 9/11.
I attended a business law seminar yesterday, where a panel of arbitrators discussed the frequency with which 9/11 was raised in personnel actions concerning workplace threats. Both private individuals claimed their perception of behavior as threatening had been heightened in light of 9/11, and businesses instituted a host of “zero-tolerance” policies following that date. Unspecified “security concerns” are presented as unquestionable justification for indignities and inconveniences both large and (admittedly most often) small.
I am reminded of modern-day demands for slavery reparations, which IMO detract from the very important issue of recognizing and reducing racial inequality today. And I’m sure I am not the only person who has known a jewish person who predictably cried “anti-semitism” in response to every perceived slight.
No, we should not forget the horrors of the past. And yes, 9/11 was much more recent than either the Emancipation Proclamation or the Holocaust.
But I wish more energy were directed in a positive manner to celebrating what makes America great, rather than hunkering down in defensive posture, reacting to fears and shadows. Apparently two years is too soon for that to happen. Personally, I hope it doesn’t take 60 or 140 more.
Conservatism usually lends itself to a defensive and xenophobic attitude… so 9/11 just gave a bigger push in that direction.
I agree with the OP thou that 9/11 is being used for all sorts of things… not only by Shrub. The USA didnt become a superpower by being a bully all the time… something they did right and people shouldn’t forget the positive things added by the US to the world. Still some might be more interested in keeping the populace scared and paranoid…
Riiiiight. You do realize that we suffered an attack and not some natural phenomenon like a tornado or flood, right? The fact remains that the people who are responsible for 9/11 are still out there and they aren’t just going to go away because you find the idea of war unpleasent.
I have asked this question on four BBs and have never gotten an answer beyond the purely theoretical.
How have YOU PERSONALLY been harmed or otherwise adversely affected by post-9/11 increased security measures, INCLUDING the Patriot Act?
The only thing I’ve experienced has been the fact that I now have to go through a metal detector to get into State court. (Already had to do that in Federal Court.)
I want to hear it: how has it affected YOU?
Unacceptable answers include:
a) “Well, the guys in Gitmo…”
b) “I sense an impending…”
c) “It’s beginning to look like a …”
and d) any sort of silliness containing the obligatory BB reference to a “police state”
They’re still out there, alright. But there’s never been any evidence produced that they were in Iraq. A lot of people think the war in Iraq has been diverting attention away from the war against terrorism.
Just an observation. I was in favour of the invasion of Afghanistan, by the way, usually pacifistic though I am.
I don’t think these two activities are mutually exclusive. Actually, I think we celebrate and praise ourselves (OUR liberities, OUR freedom, OUR civilization) as a way of defending against 9/11 and other anti-American behaviors. I find that people bring up 9/11 to remind the world once again that we are special, the envy of the poor and evil heathens.
I find the self-pity exhausting, especially when its wrapped around oozing patroitism.
I would not be surprised to learn there are Al Qaeda operatives in Canada too. I’d be surprised if there weren’t. Should the US invade Canada on that pretext? I feel fairly confident that there are Al Qaeda operatives in the US. Should the US invade itself? The Iraq War is just weird. Its rationale keeps changing every week.
(1) I don’t think bad policies need to personally affect me before I become concerned.
(2) Even if I was being directly affected by it, I couldn’t tell. John Ashcroft could be examining my library records right now, and I would never find out about it.
They’re going to go away because we find the idea of war really cool? Look, we’re dealing with nonrational people here. Their logic does not resemble our Earth logic. Attempting to say that we can influence their actions short of physically affecting every one of them seems rather silly to me.
Strawman. None of us are being held as material witnesses or had war declared upon us, with the exception of any Iraqi posters. This does not change the fact that it’s frigging bad that people are being held as material witnesses and/or having war declared upon them.
And what’s this stuff about people being held as material witnesses? Yes, it’s happening. And it happened long before 9/11. In New York (and in most other states) there are laws on the books pertaining to material witnesses, AND their detention by the sheriff, that long predate 9/11. (CPL 620 et seq.)
As far as war being “bad”, I am in agreement with you there.
Personally. Ft. Meade used to do an absolutely wonderful 4th of July fireworks display that was open to the public. They no longer will allow the public on base. It takes much longer to get on an airplane now, nor can I go to the gate to wait for people. When going to specific buildings I have to pass through much longer security procedures as well as have armed guards patrolling the halls. These are the only ways I have personally been affected by the Federal Government’s response to 9/11.
However, let me state that I am in full agreement with each of the these procedures. I don’t think it is safe for large groups of the public to be let into Ft. Meade anymore. I agree with the reasons behind, while not always the competence of the implementer, of the airport policy. I can fully understand the reason behind much stiffer scrutiny when entering certain government buildings, as well as having armed guards patrolling the halls of these buildings.
So, well I have personally been inconvenienced by several of the security measures enacted by the Federal Government in response to 9/11, I have not been hurt by them.
Yes, Guinastasia, I DO want to go there, as it seems to me your analogy is a bit, shall we say tortured. On 9/11 the US mainland was attacked for the first time in a century, 3000-odd people lost their lives as a direct result thereof, and the US and even the global economy were both knocked off kilter for a time there, so the thing had not only national but global consequences. I think the word “epochal” might be, indeed has been used.
Ratcheting up domestic intelligence efforts against, for example, the al-Farooq mosque on Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn (through which much of 9/11 was financed, by the way) might aggrieve a certain number of people but it does not have global or life-and-death consequences. NO ONE DIES. No country’s economy falls into the shitter, even briefly, as a result of the increased stringency. Keeping 600 detainees at Gitmo under what are generally conceded to be better conditions than these people enjoyed in their home countries likewise has not rained down death on the detainees or any other group of people. The feared military tribunals have not materialized, and in fact the detainees are a bit of an albatross around Uncle’s neck… the problem being that efforts to repatriate some of these fellows have been met with diplomatic cold shoulders from the countries to which these people would be returned.
The post-9/11 measures have, to the overwhelming majority of the populace, been at best invisible, at worst minimally intrusive.
And they have been warranted.
Nor have I been harmed “personally” by the Patriot Act and other measures.
So what’s your point? Mine is that I think the measures taken by the government following 9-11 will be a real problem and will end up costing us down the line. Just because I wasn’t “personally” harmed doesn’t mean I can’t say that.
Ummm… OK. Each and every one of the sumbitches dead, along with the people that financed, encouraged and sheltered them. That sounds like a plan to me; and it seems to me we’re already doing it.
