9/11 4 years ago

Remove all ads!

Yeah, but only the specific individuals, not the whole group to which they belong. That would be like burning US flags because some crazy redneck in the hills said on TV that if he had a nuke, he'd use it to "burn those stinking towelheads."

 

Well the flag desecration is understandable, as he seen Palistanians celebrating that tragedy, but what is not cool, is that Seikh community are constantly getting threats and beatings in New York. Even if they were Muslims, they do not deserve 'revenge' attacks.

Maybe we could see why the Palistanians are celebrating, as the US favours Israel over the Israel/Palistine conflict.

When we see conflict in the world, we should not choose a champion side, and keep our noses our of other peoples business.

[ September 19, 2005, 09:33: Message edited by: Cúchulainn ]

 

Some Palestinians celebrated,
I recall Iraq on the other hand sending it's condolences.

 

lots of people around the world celebrated the destruction at the WTC, the media only showed the palestinians celebrating because it would fuel US anger toward them in support of israel. if you wanted to lash out at every country which had citizens celebrating the event then you would have to burn alot of flags, including the union jack and your stars and stripes.

why do people get upset by something which doesnt effect them?

st james, were any of your family members killed in the wtc incident? any friends? any collegues? did it effect your finances directly?

if not, then why are you upset? people die on a daily basis, do you get upset for the iraqi people dieing in bombings? the isralies or palestinians who die all the time? do you desecate british and american flags for whats happening there?

were all human

 

After 9/11 broadcast footage depicting Palestinians celebrating was omnipresent on U.S. networks (I remember seeing it on MSNBC and CNN then). The brief footage was typically broadcast cyclically and used as an interview aid, with anchors asking U.S. government officials and others how they felt about the images.

Almost universally the anchors presented the footage failing to note any context to the images.

A number of points must be made, first about the actual footage: There are three million Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip and West Bank including Jerusalem, one million Palestinians living inside the borders of Israel, and another four million Palestinian refugees living elsewhere in the world, including the United States.

The footage in question depicted between 20 and 40 individuals. The Palestinians in the footage were mostly young children. It is IMO questionable if they really understood the impact their act would have in this context. Most of their behaviour in the footage appeared to be no different from how Palestinian children always behave when foreign journalists turn up in their towns, crowding and smiling at the camera and giving the victory sign.

Somewhere in my deep memory there is a note that a tv crew reportedly payed Palestinian kids to burn a U.S. flag ... maybe to provide such footage in a time of need - though I can't provide a link for that.

True, the pics did show genuine rejoicing at the attacks, but anchors interpreting the footage made no effort to offer any context or background to the images. A comparable situation would be television anchors angrily reacting to scenes of the 1991 riots in Los Angeles, lamenting that "blacks do not respect law and order", while failing to note the preceding attack on Rodney King or endemic racial profiling of the black community in the U.S. by police forces.

A good deal of the Israeli military hardware the Palestinians find themselves at the receiving end of comes from the U.S. Having shrapnel made in America in your leg or your aunty or your uncle can cause people being angry at the U.S. So to say, Palestinian disenchantment with America didn't fall out of a blue sky. Proper journalists would have pointed that out, and still would have been able to take offense on the footage.

Leaving it uncommented, however, turns it into a representative Palestinian statement - which is a stretch, to put it mild.

I find it amazing that the public climate seems such that it is a little sensation that a high level conference only stated a week ago that to address grievances exploited by terrorist leaders is not to reward terrorism but that, quite the contrary, addressing these grievances is essential to diminishing support for terrorism. No kidding. It took approx 4 years to be able to spell that out in public without being shouted down as a Saddam loving appeaser. For an OODA loop that is extremely slow ...

About St. James' post I find the wording interesting, it's about 'desecrating' - not just burning, destroying or smearing with excrement or whatever else might come to mind - it was a ritual not just a mere act ... I wonder, too, what makes a flag 'sacred'.

However, in the end, none of the 9/11 goons was Palestinian. Whatever one wants to say about St. James' flag desecration (whatever that means anyway), premature or arbitrary would be rather descriptive. By standards of arbitrariness St. James could have as well desecrated a Chinese, Russian or Singaporian flag for good measure.

The thing with the Sikhs is a good example. They are not only not monotheistic Muslims but pantheistic Indians, and not even remotely Arabian but Ayran - if it's about race. After 9/11 white heated jingoism grabbed parts of America and was amplified in the media, namely talk-radio and FOX-News: Sikh of Muslim? Who cares? They're both dark-skinned, bearded towelheads. The same can be said about Palestinians and other Arabs: Close enough for me ... *whack*

Sure, whacking a person and ritually 'desecrating' a palestinian flag are follies on a different level, but they emerge from the same mindset.

It's a display of empty-headed ignorance in particular and of the ugly side of national sentiment in general. Nothing special, as, sadly, after the underground bombings hate crime also rose in the U.K.

EDIT: Su Tsu taught his men to "know your enemy" before going into battle. For if "you know your enemy and know yourself," he wrote, "you need not fear the result of a hundred battles." But, Sun Tzu warned, "If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat."

I feel tempted to add: "And if you don't know your enemy and hit the wrong guy, you're going to get yourself another enemy."

[ September 19, 2005, 14:59: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

On that day I was still living in Oregon, preparing to move back east. Hubby was in NJ on a business trip. I had to vacate the house for the day since it was tour day for real estate agents.

I had lolled in bed until Arlyn (then 15 months old) made me get up, then took him downstairs for breakfast. I decided to call my mom and finalize logistics for an interview trip I had at the end of the week, when I would get to see her, too.

She told me to turn on the TV.

For the next hours I couldn't get more than 10 feet from the news. When I finally had to go, I took Arlyn to daycare then went to the library but couldn't settle in and read, so I went to Starbucks. People there were obsessed with the events, logically enough - there was some comfort to be had in the company of strangers. And then Starbucks decided to close early, so their employees could go be with their families. I was struck by the irony between this decision and the Starbucks ad campaign at the time, proclaiming htem to be a valued member of the community. Great, take that community away just when people need a gathering-place most.

I went home early; needless to say there hadn't been much traffic through the house. I still couldn't pry myself away from the TV, even though no new facts were emerging. I had worked in those buildings. I was supposed to be there the next workday after the 1993 bombings. I couldn't help but wonder about the fate of my former boss. I still don't know.

One of our friends was a native New yorker who remembers seeing the Towers being built, and knew people there. He was really shaken up. Pardon me if it's not something I take lightly.

 

I was at work, in a meeting, and when I came out of the meeting everyone had stopped working. We had been going though layoff after layoff, so I figured that someone or a bunch of someones had been canned while I was in the meeting, and so I walked up to a friend's cube to find out who and was told that an airplane had hit the WTC. He had a radio on, and about that time the second plane hit and we all looked at each other and knew that our world had just changed.

One of the personally amazing things I remember was that I was scheduled to give blood a couple days after the attack, and it was amazing to see the turnout at that drive.

Humans can do great things when our minds are set to it...great good and great wrong.

 

Exactly right, Harbourboy, only those specifically that label themselves as enemies would be targets of my wrath. If they start on a death to infidels routine, please pardon me for being an infidel who would fight to the death to protect those infidels who are among my family and friends...

 

Too right Gnarf. Though I dispise the war on Iraq, I am sure I would still be the enemy to some extreme Islamic fanatics, and they would happily have me dead. But at the same time, I see no sense in killing innocent Muslims, just because they are easy targets. Some people enact 'revenge' on men that wear turbins, and women that wear veils. Heck, if it was not for my long hair, I would probably look slightly eastern, due to my Irish Traveller heritage. I would probably be beaten in New York if I had short hair, and a beard/mostache!