Yes. I got up, brushed my teeth, started some coffee, and sat down at my computer that morning. My home screen has been CNN for a long time. Up came the CNN main screen with the headline in huge type which said America Under Attack. I snickered!
You see, around that time there had been a lot of website hijackings, so I assumed it had happened to CNN. A few seconds later, I realized it wasn't a joke and turned on the TV to find the combined attacks being covered on every channel.
That's my 9/11 story. I'm sure some of you have more interesting ones, be they happy or sad or tragic. How did you hear about it? How did it affect you? How is it continuing to affect you?
Most of the radical Islamicists want theocracies established - so in that regard I would argue twitter has done more for the cause than Bin Laden.
As for rallying people to attack U.S. interests, one might say his 1998 fatwa succeeded - but other than U.S. interests in occupied countries, I'm not sure the U.S. is facing any more hostility than before 9/11.
I was in high school at the time. In art class, which was right across from the main office, and through the open door I saw the TV showing the towers burning, and I went to see what movie was the trailer for... and then I realized it was on CNN and it was actually happening.
First, Judith, let me make it clear that not all Americans felt the way your doctor did. And none would have supported the invasion of Iraq, had we known the WMD fiasco was a lie. Your own country is probably even more steeped in stories of Nazi Germany than mine, so it should be obvious to what extent politicians can whip up public opinion when it serves their purpose.
As for Afghanistan, the Taliban had control of the country, and our intelligence indicated that they had the power to turn bin Ladin over for punishment, had they chosen to do so. we made the consequences of failing to do so clear to all who would listen. They chose to harbor him. Do you not feel that any of the blame falls on them?
Many, many innocent Afghan civilians died needlessly, but did the Taliban meet us with tanks and planes? They fired from schoolhouses and mosques, so that any returned fire would be sure to harm innocents or damage "sacred" shrines - where was their concern?
I personally have no bloodlust, but having already tried once earlier to attack the twin towers, it should be obvious to any that the man had to be prevented from doing any more harm. I would personally rather have seen him imprisoned for the remainder of his life. The survivors and the friends and loved ones of those who were crushed beneath tons of steel and concrete, will continue to suffer for the rest of their lives, while bin Ladin feels nothing.
RE: "First of all did i say ALL american felt the way of that particular one i described as an arse ?" - no, you did not, nor did I say you did. I was simply making a statement of fact.
RE: "Second, what has nazi Germany got to do with this discussion...." - if you have no awareness of how Hitler's rhetoric stirred up the German people to fall behind his cause, then you likely have not watched many of the old news reels of the era. My point was that political leaders can have that effect, and that Americans are not immune to it.
I see no reason as to why bin Laden should have been accorded the special privilege of being tried according to Islamic law, when the crimes he committed weren't against Muslims. I suspect the US wanted bin Laden, but declined to capitulate to conditions. The Taliban couldn't have been too concerned about the consequences, or they would have handed him over unconditionally.
Gitmo was, and is, a travesty of justice and of all of the principles America is supposed to stand for - you will get no argument from me there. That Gitmo was a Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld innovation, I can understand - it shames me to see that Obama has allowed it to continue.
Judith, are there no wackos among your countrymen? No people who overreact? I am sure there are.
As for the followup question you proposed, I think most English speakers would find it hard to interpret, unless by "stated" you meant "sated" (satisfied). I'll assume the latter. My own answer will be unsatisfactory, I'm sure. My answer would be "Quite possibly, unless some terrorist commits another act of terror in the name of 9/11." Since that appears to have just happened with the murder of our ambassador to Libya and several of his coworkers, we'll see.
Thank you for the correction, the perils of typing english on a Dutch iPad without auto correction turned off.
Unseen of course there are wackos in my country, the difference is they do not have command of a vast arsenal and I like to think are a little more circumspect and proportionate.
Many acts might amount to terrorism, its a much abused word. I wonder, does having a national emblem emblazoned on the side of the tools of "terrorism" make them legitimate and anything they are used to do right and legal. Its just a thought.
Judith vd R.
PS Unseen; if you are going to reply please try and be a little more economical than many of the replies you post (not including your last to me), I am a busy mother, I have to skip most of the long ones you post!
But you described a doctor, not someone with a nuclear arsenal.
Short enough for you?
Ever hear of "Dr No" ?
Some people talk 'big', when the testosteron is flowing, and revenge is in the air.
I wonder if the fellow understood anything about fallout and 'Just War' theory.
I was in bootcamp...and that morning they shut the whole base down. Put up cement blockers in all the parking lots, armed men on top of the buildings. Honestly, we all thought it was part of some weird training we just had not gotten to yet.
Was several days later, we where sitting in a class on how to act as a POW. One of the guys was passing around some really bad rap song he had written...basically about how this all sucked. Instructor found it and lost his shit told us we where under attack from terrorist. So they finally turned on the TV and let us watch the news.....
Real feeling of crap this shit just real....