Feeling Cyncial About 9/11 Anniversary

I'll probably get my head chewed-out for this one but meh, so be it.


I am feeling cynical about the coming 10 year anniversary of 9/11. Maybe it's because of the media circus that is an inevitable part of the "American way" that is fueling my distaste for the event. I can almost feel the collective masturbation of producers of the major news outlets as they prepare their sweeping and dramatic montages and coverage of the days to come. This is what they live for.


Or maybe it is due to the fact the yes, we lost 3000 people that day and it was a sad and tragic event but I still cannot come to terms with our losses equating to the deaths of minimally 100,000 Iraqis with upward estimates pushing the one million mark.


About 303 times as many people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than in the ghastly attacks of September 11, 2001.

Where are the montages for them?


I do not in any way condone the attacks or deny the heroism of so many professional rescue workers that gave their lives on that day. Should there be memorials to honor them? Yes. But should this country stand still on 9/11/2011 to relive the horrors of that day and the horrors of the days following?  Would not a more fitting rememberance be just that, remembrance? Each person should remember the day in their own way. Of course I do not have to watch the media blitz if I choose not to. But I just might, in the vain hope that they also recognize the thousands of innocent children who lost their lives as a result of our lust for vengeance. Least not we forget them and remember them as well for they also deserve our honor and our tears.

Views: 687

Comment by Kairan Nierde on September 6, 2011 at 9:48pm

I remember the flags flapping off of plastic holsters jammed in the windows of every third car...flags that were displayed in all kinds of weather, without lighting by nightfall...left up for months until they became stained yellow with dirt and shredded half to tatters.  Disgusting.  I guess I'm old fashioned, but I respect the symbolism of the flag enough to honor it.  No flag shirts, curtains, or lighters in my house.  We have two flags:  a cloth one, which we inherited (and don't display), and a nylon flag for holidays (or days I know I'll be there to bring it back in).


I know we all wanted to show our solidarity after 9-11.  But I refused to hypocritically adopt a ultra-patriotic front and plaster myself with stripes and stars when the week before I scoffed at such people.  Instead, I donated what I could to charities for victims and rescuers and I followed the news, trying to reason with family and friends as we seemed to inevitably hurtle toward war in Afghanistan.  I got my first death threat at High School for posing the theory that there might not be weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that our government may have ulterior motives for entering Iraq.  I voted and became politically organized.  "Patriotism" isn't something you wear or tack onto your car...it is just doing your civic duty.         

Comment by Unseen on September 6, 2011 at 11:09pm

Genocide? Sorry, that is a conscious attempt to obliterate an entire people off the face of the earth. Casualties, no matter how high, don't rise to the level of genocide without that intention.

Apparently we were convinced there were WMD's in Iraq based on false testimony, abetted by Saddam Hussein's rather evasive response. It's not clear that leaving Iraq in Hussein's hands would have been better for the Iraqis since he actually DID engage in killing conforming to the definition of genocide.

War is hell and people die, but bear in mind that Hussein has killed as many as a million Iraqis through his wars with Iran and Kuwait, genocide of the Kurds, secret police handling dissidents, and his general brutality. In the end, what would be better for the Iraqis? To have left him in place? And once he was gone, should we have simply left the country in a state of anarchy? Clearly, we are TRYING to get out in an orderly fashion, we have not claimed any oil wells despite the huge sum of money we have spent there.

Speculating about what might or might not have happened if we hadn't gone there is just that. Speculation. There are no facts to appeal to. Not in this universe.

Comment by Albert Bakker on September 7, 2011 at 1:51am

Well if you're playing semantics with genocide stick it to the Darfur crowd, because the US certainly declared it a genocide in 2004, except the rest of the world didn't.

You want to put part blame of the decision to inavde and occupy Iraq on Saddam's "evasive response" as in turning over every Iraqi document relevant or not ever made to the US? Think war would have been avoided if he put billboards up on US highways saying "I don't have 'em, honestly!" Especially so since the Iraq war was already decided to be on even before 911 it seems that all the US needed was an excuse.

By the way you seem to forget a minor detail that during Anfal and Iran-Iraq war Saddam Hussein was supported by the US. The poison gas precursors were imported from Western countries with approval of the US, among others from my country the Netherlands.

Here you have a couple of neocons cheering for Saddam in real time: http://www.tomjoad.org/pipes_supportSaddam.pdf

And lets not kid ourselves that this is about Iraqis. No one gives a rats ass about Iraqis, it's about geopolitics and American control. The neocon movement was very open about this, taking advantage of this window of opportunity after the fall of the USSR during which a monopolar world order leaves for grabs consolidation of raw American military power over the world to ensure US domination. We are now living the days that we enter a multipolar world order and the answer why this was a capital mistake of the US on geopolitics.

In fact to rub some salt in the wounds al Qaida is winning. It looks even in Libya


Comment by Unseen on September 7, 2011 at 2:07am

Semantics? Words have meanings. Once you start making words mean whatever you want communication becomes impossible.


Iran-Iraq war? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."


Americans don't want their government to ignore international power politics in the interest of being all warm and fuzzy. The other countries certainly won't. If the world's going to be dominated, one would be wise to be on the dominant side.

Comment by Atheist Exile on September 7, 2011 at 4:33am

Are we fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq for vengeance?  That strikes me as sensationalism.  We fought Saddam, mostly, because he was a threat to the uninterrupted flow of oil.  Plus he made the President's father look bad. :-)  The war in Afghanistan is part of the war on terrorism.  How effective we've been is certainly up for debate but I have no doubt that terrorism MUST be squashed.

Thanks to 9/11 and other developments in the world, I'm not as liberal as I used to be on foreign affairs.  Idealism is a seductive part of the liberal mindset.  Foreign affairs need to be tempered by realism -- not that idealism has no place in the international arena -- but it's a dangerous world out there and we need to protect our interests accordingly.  The chief global threat, other than economic collapse, appears to be terrorism.  At least, it certainly is to me and . . . for that reason, I see the war in Afghanistan as regrettable but necessary.

Comment by Robert Karp on September 7, 2011 at 8:20am

By any means necessary Sassan is that it?

Have some moral clarity.

You do not have to agree with my opinions but suggesting that because we have differing views on this topic, somehow I lack moral clarity is just juvenile.


Your opinion is liberation by any means necessary not matter the loss of life, no matter the destruction of the nation itself because in the end things will be better? And if you are including Afghanistan in your list of "succeses" I would challange you to explain yourself. Because 10 years later that war is still going on, we are negiating with the Taliban, Hamid Karzi is corrupt and the drug trade is booming.  Oh and the country is in ruins. Successful? 

We can debate back and forth on whether or not we agree on the validity on the wars and we will never acquiesce to each others positions and that is fine. I am not trying to change your opinion and frankly I do not care. My piece was on how I feel we the media lacks a balanced view on the loss of life. This piece is not on the justification of the wars.


You are free to disagree with my piece as is everyone else, however character attacks will not be tolerated. For the last time, learn to argue.

Comment by Robert Karp on September 7, 2011 at 8:27am

@Atheist Exile, ok so the word "vengeance" was never actually used by the media but what do you think it was? The mantra was we would get the terrorists wherever they hide. If that is not vengeful thinking I just don't know what is. And you are correct, Iraq was about oil, and about Bush the elder but at the time, and I remember this clearly they were associating 9/11 with Iraq and Iraq with Al-Queda. Bush and Cheney wanted to say you attack us, whatever happens to your or your people is on you. That is vengeance.


@James, I forgot about the flags.

@Unseen, "War is hell" yes and can't we be just as conscious about the loss of like from the wars as we are about the loss of like from 9/11?


Here are the goals of the group 9/11 Families for a Peaceful Tomorrow, this is really what I am saying, there is more to 9/11 then the 3000 people who died:


1. To promote dialogue on alternatives to war, while educating and raising the consciousness of the public on issues of war, peace, and the underlying causes of terrorism.

2. To support and offer fellowship to others seeking non-violent responses to all forms of terrorism, both individual and institutional.

3. To call attention to threats to civil liberties, human rights, and other freedoms in the U.S. as a consequence of war.

4. To­ acknowledge our fellowship with all people affected by violence and war, recognizing that the resulting deaths are overwhelmingly civilian.

5. To encourage a multilateral, collaborative effort to bring those responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks to justice in accordance with the principles of international law.

6. To promote U.S. foreign policy that places a priority on internationally-recognized principles of human rights, democracy and self-rule.

7. To demand ongoing investigations into the events leading up to the September 11, 2001 attacks that took the lives of our loved ones, including exhaustive examinations of U.S. foreign policies and national security failures.

Comment by Ed on September 7, 2011 at 8:31am

I've never understood the necessity for remembrance of atrocities. We need to let those events die in our minds and move on. In a weird way only possible in Amerika a remembrance some how turns into a celebration. Celebration of what? Mankind continues to kill one another tit for tat. Our evolutionary process needs to hurry along.

War truly is the scourge of mankind.

Comment by Robert Karp on September 7, 2011 at 8:36am

@ Ed   "War truly is the scourge of mankind." exactly.

Comment by Rick on September 7, 2011 at 11:30am

I cant wait until 9/11 is just another day that falls between 9/10 and 9/12. Making it a media circus and a big political circle-jerk does very little to honor the memory of anyone lost in the attacks.Turn it into a national holiday already and let it join the ranks of the other holidays that we celebrate through cook-outs, family gatherings, days off from work and with silly elementary school art projects.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service