9/11 Well Wishes For Americans

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:31 am

Snowfire;1403845 wrote: The tone of your post "...they're the innocent victims" , suggests you dont regard the 9/11 victims as such. Despite many unanswered questions and uncertainties in respect of that day, I do.Who are you using the term "9/11 victims" about? Those who died at the crash sites? They're innocent victims if you exclude any plotters, though outnumbered ten thousand to one by the people living in Iraq and Afghanistan who've ended up with years of foreign occupation and consequently destroyed lives, as they watch profiteers walk away with fortunes.

Do I regard the American people in general as victims of 9/11? Not really, no. Any sense in which it can be said American citizens as a whole are victims of 9/11 precludes sympathy for them. You cannot isolate a people from its leadership, no leadership exists in a vacuum, that damned US White House administration governed and reacted by consent. Go and check the opinion polls.

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:35 am

LarsMac;1403846 wrote: If the leader defines the nation then, "grieve for the Iraqis and Afghans, they're the innocent victims in all this." is incorrect.

They were no more innocent than the Americans.

In respect of 9/11 they were completely untainted by any of it - the planning, the commissioning, the execution. Of the American agencies it can at the very least be said they systematically turned a blind eye to enable the crime, and that if they didn't they were unbelievably incompetent.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:36 am

spot;1403852 wrote: Who are you using the term "9/11 victims" about? Those who died at the crash sites?

Clearly ! I shan't speak for others but I suspect they were too.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:41 am

spot;1403852 wrote:

Do I regard the American people in general as victims of 9/11? Not really, no. Any sense in which it can be said American citizens as a whole are victims of 9/11 precludes sympathy for them. You cannot isolate a people from its leadership, no leadership exists in a vacuum, that damned US White House administration governed and reacted by consent. Go and check the opinion polls.

You have to make a distinction between a Nations citizens and its Government's foreign policy. Its like saying you blame me and thee for Blairs lies to get us into the war. Blair and Bush are to blame for the deaths of Iraqis not the American people

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:44 am

What about the family member of my brother's brother In law? She was Japanese working for a Japanese company In the twin towers/

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:49 am

Snowfire;1403854 wrote: Clearly ! I shan't speak for others but I suspect they were too.

Then we all feel regret at their loss, me as much as anyone. That's not what every thread around 9/11 has limited itself to though. They all, invariably, extend that sympathy to all Americans. I find that bizarre, considering that unleashing America's armed forces across the Middle East with the overwhelming backing of the American people was Osama bin Laden's declared objective for the 9/11 attack. Had the American people not been so predictably simple-minded there would have been no benefit at all in organizing the attack in the first place.

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:50 am

I don't think the opinion polls agreeing to outrageous attacks on sovereign nations after 9/11 show that the American people chose the wars. I think it shows that the American government shamelessly manipulated a nation of people in shock. Instead of taking care of them, their government elevated fear and kept them vulnerable, only pausing to release their psychotic grip on the distress of the nation when they wanted them to shop more.

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:54 am

Snowfire;1403856 wrote: You have to make a distinction between a Nations citizens and its Government's foreign policy. Its like saying you blame me and thee for Blairs lies to get us into the war. Blair and Bush are to blame for the deaths of Iraqis not the American people

No, go and check the opinion polls at the time. America went into the Middle East wholeheartedly, the UK involvement had minority support and huge anti-war demonstrations. It was an unpopular government war, and only the disreputable tired old lie "support our boys it's not their fault" kept anyone's flag flying.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:55 am

spot;1403860 wrote: Then we all feel regret at their loss, me as much as anyone. That's not what every thread around 9/11 has limited itself to though. They all, invariably, extend that sympathy to all Americans. I find that bizarre, considering that unleashing America's armed forces across the Middle East with the overwhelming backing of the American people was Osama bin Laden's declared objective for the 9/11 attack. Had the American people not been so predictably simple-minded there would have been no benefit at all in organizing the attack in the first place.

You need to target your animosity toward the administration in the US and the Government here in the UK. We were lied to. Pure and simple. It wasn't due to " simple mindedness ". Manipulation of the facts here and abroad. We were sucked in.

Except you presumably

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:03 pm

Snowfire;1403864 wrote: You need to target your animosity toward the administration in the US and the Government here in the UK. We were lied to. Pure and simple. It wasn't due to " simple mindedness ". Manipulation of the facts here and abroad. We were sucked in.

Except you presumably
There will always be people on the Internet world wide who believed the American people 'got what they deserved'... they write their poison behind a keyboard with one hand probably while fiddling with their gusset with their other hand....

I am of the opinion, they are best left to their own bitterness... I'd rather genuinely remember the people not the politics.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:09 pm

I never said I thought it was wrong to feel sympathy for American people affected by loss due to the events of 9/11/2001, what I said is I don't think they should be directed at me, or anyone else who has not experienced loss from the events. It simply isn't right in my mind that I be offered sympathy for it, and I think it's even worse should I accept those sympathies. Much of what this thread has attracted is indicative of self-serving commentary. Not that that's a bad thing, I just wonder what's happened to the idea of humility on both sides of the issue.

LarsMac and Koan both expressed a more valid point for sympathy for Americans with the fact that it's relevant to feel sorry for us because our way of life along with our political/corporate leaders invited the attacks and overreacted as a result by not only spraying the Middle East with bombings by also used these horrific events to curtail our freedoms and liberties. I accept those sympathies.

If we're going to be honoring every event that leave people even slightly traumatized then I doubt there are enough seconds in a year in which to honor all those observances.

I can understand a person saying: "To those people who suffered loss innocently due to the events of 9/11/2001, we'll never forget." Anything else sounds hollow to me, and also like lip-smacking do to the kissing of American ass for the purpose garnering personal support.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:16 pm

koan;1403861 wrote: I don't think the opinion polls agreeing to outrageous attacks on sovereign nations after 9/11 show that the American people chose the wars. I think it shows that the American government shamelessly manipulated a nation of people in shock. Instead of taking care of them, their government elevated fear and kept them vulnerable, only pausing to release their psychotic grip on the distress of the nation when they wanted them to shop more.I recall the concert at Madison Square Garden for 9/11 when Richard Gere said to the audience that it was a good time to reflect and he was throughly booed for the comment to which he subtly replied "I guess you're not feeling that way right now.".

No doubt government sources were watching that event and saw how easily the American people could be manipulated. And were we ever.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:20 pm

Ahso!;1403868 wrote: It simply isn't right in my mind that I be offered sympathy for it, and I think it's even worse should I accept those sympathies.
What action on your part is involved in "accepting" sympathy? Do you feel that if you sit tacitly that you are accepting it? If so, is that why you feel you must make such a public effort at rejecting the undeserved sympathy, lest the other person mistakenly interprets your silence as acceptance??

I'm only asking because I'm baffled why you're making such drama about a simple gesture.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 12:26 pm

Accountable;1403871 wrote: What action on your part is involved in "accepting" sympathy? Do you feel that if you sit tacitly that you are accepting it? If so, is that why you feel you must make such a public effort at rejecting the undeserved sympathy, lest the other person mistakenly interprets your silence as acceptance??

I'm only asking because I'm baffled why you're making such drama about a simple gesture.Thoughts. Just thoughts. No drama. That would be a misunderstanding. I see nothing wrong with encouraging self-reflection.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 1:38 pm

Ahso!;1403745 wrote: I figured I'd not cause any more of an uproar in the "We'll Never Forget" thread because I doubt this perspective is welcomed there. Hence this thread.

WARNING: For those individuals who cannot understand or consider alternative discussions on subjects, you're probably wasting your time reading beyond this point.

So, I don't get it! Why are people extending their condolences to me for the events of 9/11? I didn't suffer any personal loss due to the event. I feel as bad for those who did lose loved ones on that day and it just seems to me that extending sorrow in my direction is displaced. I'm uncomfortable with it.

If the reason people offer their regrets is because 9/11 happened in my country, again, I say that's like saying that I'm being comforted for the house down the block burning down and family members there not surviving. It makes no sense to me.

If the reason that people extend regret to us living Americans is because some of our fellow Americans lost their lives on that day, I say accepting those regrets is selfish on my part and it's delusional as well. Us Americans spend so much time deriding one another it's more of an insult than anything else in some ways.

As i type this our two political parties are falsely accusing each other of lying, cheating, hating and so on; many of our religious leaders are devising ways of excluding gays and other minority group members from enjoying what life may offer them and damning them to hell; the people whose education we provide are finding themselves captive to job offers that are merely schemes to separate us from that money we toiled so hard to connive out of others for the purpose of abiding in our homes built for denial.

So someone please tell me, why are you extending regret in my direction if not for some self-serving reasons of your own?

If someone offers condolences and best wishes you can either punch them in the face because you think they are taking the piss or accept them as if they are sincere even if you believe them not to be. The latter approach is best in my opinion since if they were taking the piss or trying to wind you up you demonstrate to them they have failed and you are choosing not to get annoyed. A lot of people don't feel empathy towards others and really can't understand it when they meet it. It's sad but there it is - to assume that everybody is insincere is very sad as well. I don't think you are like that but why choose to take offence? Just ignore members that annoy you.

I have no time for the wars in irag or Afghanistan but I have relatives who have been out there and know several soldiers who have also been involved so when someone basically says of those who have died or been injured out there tough **** you chose to go I bite my tongue and say nothing because the chances are they wouldn't be able to understand why soldiers and their families are worthy our condolences and refuse to waste my time trying to get them to understand.

We could be petty and take offence at NBC refusing to show the tribute to victims of the london bombings but that would be petty and most americans - at least the ones worth bothering about would probably find NBC a bit silly as well and be annoyed at the impression of them given by NBC. By the way is it true that they refused to show the paralympics except for edited highlights on the grounds that no one would be interested? Sad if true, would they turn their backs on crippled ex servicemen the same way? I'm inclined to think it reflects an attitude to the disabled of keep out of sight we don;t want to know.

NBC coverage: Outrage by claiming 7/7 tribute in Olympic Opening Ceremony 'wasn't tailored to U.S. audience' | Mail Online

The daily mail likes to find think to take umbrage at. Too bad they didn't take umbrage at tony blair et al but it's a shitty tory rag so what do you expect.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:02 pm

gmc;1403887 wrote: If someone offers condolences and best wishes you can either punch them in the face because you think they are taking the piss or accept them as if they are sincere even if you believe them not to be. The latter approach is best in my opinion since if they were taking the piss or trying to wind you up you demonstrate to them they have failed and you are choosing not to get annoyed. A lot of people don't feel empathy towards others and really can't understand it when they meet it. It's sad but there it is - to assume that everybody is insincere is very sad as well. I don't think you are like that but why choose to take offence? Just ignore members that annoy you.As I said to another member here privately, my initiating this thread was not out of feeling offended, though I'd be lying if i said the thought wasn't provoked by the reminder the other thread provided.

These really are just personal considerations that I thought would make an interesting discussion. Had I wanted to attack or behave defensively, I could have and would have done that in the other thread.

Bruv made a certain point in his post that while he agreed with what I posted he thought the timing was off. Well, he's had 11 years to bring the subject up and hasn't so lecturing me is a bit misplaced, IMV. I prefer to think now is as perfect a time as any to discuss this topic. As has been demonstrated in this thread, some of us are adult like enough to talk about this without getting our panties all bunched up.

Thanks for your input, it's always welcomed.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:13 pm

koan;1403861 wrote: I don't think the opinion polls agreeing to outrageous attacks on sovereign nations after 9/11 show that the American people chose the wars. I think it shows that the American government shamelessly manipulated a nation of people in shock. Instead of taking care of them, their government elevated fear and kept them vulnerable, only pausing to release their psychotic grip on the distress of the nation when they wanted them to shop more.

Excellent post, IMO

eta--I was never bamboozled into thinking Iraq was a good thing. I remembered GWB spoke about invading Iraq BEFORE he was elected, he wanted personal revenge on Saddam for putting a hit out on daddy Big George. For any American who cared to know this before his election----it was available to know.

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:15 pm

I think the anniversary of 9/11 is the perfect time to review all opinions of the event. If there is ever going to be a proper investigation, the energy to do so will best be garnered at every anniversary of the event.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:19 pm

koan;1403914 wrote: I think the anniversary of 9/11 is the perfect time to review all opinions of the event. If there is ever going to be a proper investigation, the energy to do so will best be garnered at every anniversary of the event.

For 11 years, you and anyone else has had the opportunity on 364 days a year to raise the politics and Issue associated with 9/11.

It's the fact that no-one does choose any of those 364 days to raise a debate that speaks volumes,

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:21 pm

oscar;1403917 wrote: It's the fact that no-one does choose any of those 364 days to raise a debate that speaks volumes,
Were it a fact, you might have a point. Do you really think it's a fact?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:23 pm

spot;1403920 wrote: Were it a fact, you might have a point. Do you really think it's a fact? Pleas refrain from quoting me. Thank you.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:48 pm

There's an entitlement many Americans enjoy since 9/11 and it might the most egregious one of all; that's one of now demanding sympathy from 9/11. I can imagine some Americans sitting back at their monitors with crossed arms waiting for the sympathies to pour in over the screen. Am I right?

Many of these people do like to make an issue of entitlements to their fellow Americans though. That's just so hypocritical.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:50 pm

Fine If It was just Americans who died In the twin towers... It wasn't.... that's what these people forget.

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 2:59 pm

Mourning the loss of 3000 people seems a little self indulgent when those lives were used to justify killing tens of thousands in completely unrelated response. Family members of those killed have expressed anger at the way their loss was used to manipulate the public and even the New Jersey Widows no longer wish to be spotlighted as victims so the rejection of sympathy isn't an unusual one.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:07 pm

spot;1403946 wrote: When you quote Snowfire's response to me and say "they write their poison behind a keyboard with one hand probably while fiddling with their gusset with their other hand....", oscar, there's no doubt whatever in anyone's mind who you're referring to. The fact that you say it every few weeks just adds to the impression.

Well It wasn't Intentional. I can only apologise If you thought It referred to you.

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:09 pm

SnoozeAgain;1403947 wrote: Where the hell did that come from? All I'm seeing is her politely asking you to leave her alone and you continue to insult her.

It did ooze insincerity, didn't it.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... ost1403866

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:09 pm

koan;1403945 wrote: Mourning the loss of 3000 people seems a little self indulgent when those lives were used to justify killing tens of thousands in completely unrelated response. Family members of those killed have expressed anger at the way their loss was used to manipulate the public and even the New Jersey Widows no longer wish to be spotlighted as victims so the rejection of sympathy isn't an unusual one. With the emphasis on the word 'response'.

I didn't agree with the Invasion of Iraq or Afghan but as you said, the loss of life was a response. If 9/11 had never taken place, the Invasions most likely would never have happened.

A response does not detract from the Innocent people who died on 9/11

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 3:27 pm

To offer sympathy to the people who suffered the least loss in the affair borders on ridiculous. Sympathy for 9/11 should be directed to all who suffered losses or not at all.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:08 pm

oscar;1403953 wrote:

I didn't agree with the Invasion of Iraq or Afghan but as you said, the loss of life was a response. If 9/11 had never taken place, the Invasions most likely would never have happened.
Afghanistan I might agree, but NO, an invasion of Iraq was set as soon as GWB took office. It was always his plan. Before, I said when GWB was "elected", but he did lose the popular vote, & it was the Supreme Ct. that handed it to him. It was always his plan, using the false WMDs as his excuse. It was a done deal. The neo-cons will try it again if Romney is elected, or imposed on us as GWB was.

koan · Post by **koan** » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:02 am

Going through a lot of information yesterday and one thing stands out in regards to the mourning suggestions given by officials. The people of New York were told it was safe to go back to work and encouraged to press on and try to return to their normal lives with courage. It is well known that the air was still dangerous and that the government knew this. The number of people suffering or dead from the government knowingly sending civilians back in to a toxic environment will likely double the toll of the original attack. Who is left wondering if they can trust their government now?

koan · Post by **koan** » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:12 am

The two documents are proof that "EPA officials were aware of the severity of the danger at Ground Zero in contrast to their public statements at the time," said Joel Kupferman, an environmental lawyer with the Environmental Justice Project who obtained the documents through Freedom of Information Act requests.

CNN.com - Memos: NYC told Ground Zero air was unsafe - Sep 7, 2006

koan · Post by **koan** » Wed Sep 12, 2012 12:19 am

The New York Times thinks the subject is now boring. There is a lack of "news" about the subject and no justification for further coverage.

You'd think they'd find the continuing pressure for a new investigation to be at least a little newsworthy. Over ten years later and there are still intense movements in the works. To me, that's kind of worth mentioning. At least mentioning dismissively.

Nope. The New York Times is done with reporting on the anniversary of 9/11.

Lets see if they're still done with it next year.

How to Cover the 11th Anniversary of 9/11? | The Public Editor - NYTimes.com