I posted a piece about what it was like to work in the towers when I was there.

Ginger -

What a great job! Thanks! I had to work today and got mine up too late for you to include above. It’s called The Day the World Stood Still.

I don’t remember when, it took at least a couple of days, though. Despite the reruns and the numbness and the carnage and the scope of the aftermath - not even all of this could stop the world and keep it stopped. With a small jerk and then increasing speed, the world began to move again. Soon enough it was spinning away at full speed as if nothing had ever happened.

Thanks again!

Blue

Fear is something we are supposed to fear, not a tool for furthering an agenda. I really don’t care if this ruffles any feathers, but I must say, if your life has been irrevocably changed by the attack on 9/11, then you really didn’t have a life to begin with.

Kevin,
You are either:
a) baiting the readers for a controversy, or b) truly delusional to think that our lives having changed since the events of that day.

I find your comment ironic considering who it’s coming from.

Ginger,

I see Kevin’s point, though. I’ve often lamented how “the home of the brave” has become the land of “This is the gravest threat we’ve ever faced, but let someone else enlist to fight this battle,” and “OMFG! I’m sooo skeert, I’ll give up ALL my rights, Daddy — JUST KEEP ME SAFE!”
.

So then JP…go enlist!

No, Kevin. My friend dying there didn’t change my life at all. You worthless piece of shit. I hope someone douses you in jet fuel and sets you on fire like what happened to Doug.

Well, my post got lost in internet land.

America is now the land of the scared. The government has used fear to 1) launch an unjust war; 2) shred the constitution; 3) hoard power, and 4) control the media.

Some of those things may have happened to a smaller degree had 9/11 not happened, but I daresay the country would look vastly different. I doubt George W. Bush would have been handed the blank check he received from Congress. Cries of dissent being “unpatriotic” would not have happened.

And, for crying out loud, air travel would have been a heckuva lot easier.

[…] of trite and vapid sentiment like it was the last episode of M*A*S*H*. What a sad commentary that most personal recollections of the event center on how this momentous historical event affected us while we watched it on the […]

Cries of dissent being “unpatriotic” would not have happened.

I hear ya, Beale, but really now…being tagged unpatriotic for questioning our involvement in war has been going on since the inception of our country.

As for fear, personally, I feel like we’re in a “holding pattern” mode until the ‘08 election. Things will look up then.

So…I’m not fearful, I’m hopeful.

But for a guy who doesn’t get a job, lives off of the good graces of other people to have food, clothing, shelter, and A BLOG to have the audacity to come on here and make a blanket statement that “if your life has been irrevocably changed by the attack on 9/11, then you really didn’t have a life to begin with.” is arrogant and completely insensitive. That’s some f*cking nerve.

So then JP…go enlist!

If I thought — as so many so-called patriots say that THEY do — that we’re engaged in the gravest struggle for our survival we have ever faced, I certainly would.

I don’t believe that. I didn’t believe it on 9/11/2001, certainly never believed a word of the B.S. on Iraq, and I don’t believe any of it, now.

And anyone who DOES believe that, and makes excuses for why they aren’t there, fighting the mother of all battles? Unfit to be my countrymen.
.

If it were just the war, Ginger, I’d agree. But it’s not. It’s everything. Any kind of dissent. The Patriot Act, the President’s Judicial picks … I mean, cripes, look at what Ann Coulter says about Democrats, just last week: “Dems think the troops are illiterate, toothless, rapists.” I mean honestly, would that kind of extremist talk even be allowed on the air had 9/11 not happened? And yet Coulter and her ilk routinely appear in the “mainstream” media, as if theirs is some kind of rational opinion.

I’m not fearful, either. Fear is what they’re selling, but I refuse to buy. It’s so obvious to me that the whole fear thing is a hoax being perpetrated on the American people for the purposes of controling us. Because so little real, purposeful change has actually happened; our ports are still exposed, the rigamarole passengers go through at airports is so pointless as airports still lack actual screening equipment, millions of people still stream across the borders unchecked.

I mean, if there was a **real** reason to be scared, would any of this be happening?

to have the audacity to come on here and make a blanket statement that “if your life has been irrevocably changed by the attack on 9/11, then you really didn’t have a life to begin with.” is arrogant and completely insensitive.

Of course it is. Maybe (and I’m putting words in Kevin’s mouth there), just maybe Kevin is reacting to the rather shameless way conservatives act like they own 9/11.

I didn’t blog about 9/11 on purpose. I don’t want to comemmorate the day America was attacked, as if it’s some kind of holy remembrance. It’s creepy how the right wing has attached itself to 9/11, like they own the wound. The message I get is, “it’s OUR day, beeeatches, and you commie libs can just shut up!”

Wingers like to say that Liberals want to forget 9/11. That’s not true, how can anyone forget it? But it’s not a badge of honor. It should be a badge of shame for how our government let us down that day. Instead it’s almost a celebration by the far right and it grosses me out.

So maybe that’s what Kevin is reacting to. Or maybe, like you said, he’s just go some f*cking nerve. I don’t know the guy.

What do the President’s judicial picks, which have always been the President’s prerogative, have to do with anything? Every President who has ever put anyone on the Supreme Court puts people who’ll agree with them (or who they think will agree with them) on the Supreme Court. This has not and never will change, and as Bush I could tell you, you never know what that judge will do once he gets put in place. Otherwise Souter wouldn’t be there.

Is there anything you can’t do now that you could do before 9/11, aside from bring box cutters and jumbo shampoo on a plane?

eh, from Ann Coulter to Randi Rhodes there are always going to be hyper, off-the-charts exaggerated rhetoric from every viewpoint. That’s why we have blogs, after all… lol

We’ve gotta get some balance back into this country and our society. Perhaps that’s why I call myself “moderate” because the extremists have spoiled the good points coming from both sides of the aisle.

Every President who has ever put anyone on the Supreme Court puts people who’ll agree with them (or who they think will agree with them) on the Supreme Court.

I think the point is that, pre-911, if you weren’t crazy about the Pres’s pick you were called a traitor who hates America and wants terrorists to win.

Is there anything you can’t do now that you could do before 9/11, aside from bring box cutters and jumbo shampoo on a plane?

Well for one pre-9/11, you could talk on the phone without having the government listen in or stand in peaceful protest without being forcibly moved to a “free speech zone” (several miles away) or arrested, but I don’t really think that was SoBeale’s main point.

If I might offer my interpretation, the things that actually COULD be changed to make us safer aren’t. It seems the only things that are changing are things that give the government more power to suppress political dissent.

Well for one pre-9/11, you could talk on the phone without having the government listen in or stand in peaceful protest without being forcibly moved to a “free speech zone” (several miles away) or arrested

If you’re going to call terrorists or suspected terrorists (or are one), then I have no problem with the government listening in on your phone calls. As for your protest issues, the Klan’s been complaining about that for years, but nobody’s bending over backwards to accommodate their right to free speech either.

Protest all you want so long as I can get to work on time.

Some of you guys would argue with a wet paper sack at any time. Unbelievable.

Sorry Glen…what can I say…I took the bait.

If you’re going to call terrorists or suspected terrorists (or are one), then I have no problem with the government listening in on your phone calls.

Without evidence that I’m calling anybody I shouldn’t be, you nor the government have no idea who I’m calling. I have no problems with the government listening in to a call with a terrorist or suspected terrorist (if they have any evidence at all that you are chatting it up with a terrorist or suspected terrorist a warrant is absurdly easy to get), that’s not the eavesdropping I’m referring to and you know it.

As for your protest issues, the Klan’s been complaining about that for years, but nobody’s bending over backwards to accommodate their right to free speech either.

I’ll bend over backwards to protect the Klan’s right to free speech, and I think it’s sad that you won’t. I disagree with their message, but I definitely feel they have as much right to say it as I do to counter it. If I deny their right to free speech, how can I possibly suggest that I deserve such a right.

So yes, I’ll stand up for the Klan’s speech rights just as much as I’ll stand up for the grandmother arrested for holding an anti-Bush sign AND the Bush supporters who surrounded her but were left untouched.

Protest all you want so long as I can get to work on time.

Unfortunately, under the Bush Administration, the government sharply disagrees with you here.

I’ll stand up for the Klan’s speech rights just as much as I’ll stand up for the grandmother arrested for holding an anti-Bush sign AND the Bush supporters who surrounded her but were left untouched.

WOW! Please cite supporting documentation that this occurred!

I never said I was against free speech and I have no idea where you’d get that.

The Klan has the right to free speech as much as any protest group has the right to assemble and protest; the government has the right to tell them where they can and can’t assemble for their rallies, because otherwise a mob of angry people would get together and murder them. I have no problem with peace protesters, anarchists, the Klan, or even hippies so long as they’re not being a threat to public safety. Clogging the streets is bad; clogging the park is fine.

I’ve protested at rallies that got violent, and if keeping pro and anti separated by a city block keeps them from rioting, then that’s a good thing. Nobody’s stopping you from saying a damn thing, they’re just keeping you from getting your head busted in by the opposing faction or the riot squad.

Ginger — Not sure to which grandma dolphin refers (there have been several), but this story covers some of the “low points” of First Amendment violations by the cyrrent administration, including a link to the story about the West Virginia couple who received a tidy settlement for being arrested at a Bush rally for wearing anti-Bush t-shirts.
.

Thanks, JP!

That is interesting.

I don’t see a problem with forming “rallying squads” to out-yell the dissenters…I mean, really, most pep rallies for football teams I have attended have had those.

However, for the “yes men” to even contemplate ensuring that the president never has to witness dissent further convinces me of the pathological need for control that this president has.

To relate it to a more down-to-earth level, it reminds me of when Elvis fired any of his bodyguards who stood up to him on any little thing. If he hated what the tv was showing, he just took a pistol and shot the screen out.

There’s a definite sickness there.

I just, honestly, have heard of grandmas being arrested, but have never seen any documentation on it, much less about dissenters arrested who were right beside of Bush supporters. It sounds exaggerated to me.

If I might offer my interpretation, the things that actually COULD be changed to make us safer aren’t. It seems the only things that are changing are things that give the government more power to suppress political dissent.

THAT was my main point. Thanks, Dolphin!

{{ hugs }}

Also, I don’t think it’s fair to compare Randi Rhodes with Ann Coulter. Randi may be strident in her calls for impeachment, but she’s never hurled the kind of vicious personal insults that Ann Coulter has. The things Coulter has said about 9/11 widows and Cindy Sheehan and even John and Elizabeth Edwards are unconscionable. (sp?)

This is the same Randi Rhodes who called for someone to assassinate the president, complete with gunshot SFX.

Anne Coulter has always been this way, since well before 9/11.

Here’s some documentation. This is from yesterday’s Washington Post:

Sheehan, Nine Other Protesters Are Arrested

And:
Texas Grandmother Sweeps Streets of Washington as Punishment for Protest
“Woman arrested last year for crossing police line.”

And:
Civil Disobedience for a Moral Budget
“115 religious leaders were arrested in front of the Cannon House Office Building while kneeling in prayer to protest the immoral budget and tax agenda which slashes spending on the poor to finance tax breaks for the rich. Led by Jim Wallis of Call to Renewal, national faith leaders, clergy and faith-based providers of services to the poor held a press conference.”

And:

Five Anti-War ‘Raging Grannies’ Arrested at Enlistment Office

SILVER SPRING, Maryland – Five women age 50 and older claiming they wished to enlist in the military were arrested Tuesday outside a recruiting office during an anti-war demonstration.

Saying that “if someone must die in Iraq, let it be the old,” members of Raging Grannies, Code Pink and other peace groups were taken to the Montgomery County Police Department. The county is a Washington suburb.”

Want more ???

This is the same Randi Rhodes who called for someone to assassinate the president, complete with gunshot SFX.

You’re going to have to show me where/when she said that. I’ve not heard it. I suspect if something of that nature was said, it was a bad joke gone wrong. That is not her routine spiel, although it IS with Ann Coulter. Coulter can’t make a TV appearance without saying something foul and offensive. Why she continues to be booked is beyond me, and yet yesterday Faux News had her on to offer “perspective” on the Petraeus hearings. Amazing that she’s taken seriously by the right wing noise machine.

Hey Ginger,

I actually wrote an article on it for a now-defunct website called Bad Elephant several years ago. Unfortunately that site is no longer up or I’d forward you to that article which was loaded with various sources.

Here’s an article on the phenomenon from The American Conservative (of all places) that discusses several instances of it. Here’s a decent excerpt:
” The Justice Department is now prosecuting Brett Bursey, who was arrested for holding a “No War for Oil” sign at a Bush visit to Columbia, S.C. Local police, acting under Secret Service orders, established a “free speech zone” half a mile from where Bush would speak. Bursey was standing amid hundreds of people carrying signs praising the president. Police told Bursey to remove himself to the “free speech zone.”

Bursey refused and was arrested. Bursey said that he asked the policeman if “it was the content of my sign, and he said, ‘Yes, sir, it’s the content of your sign that’s the problem.’” Bursey stated that he had already moved 200 yards from where Bush was supposed to speak. Bursey later complained, “The problem was, the restricted area kept moving. It was wherever I happened to be standing.””

Of course, I actually didn’t properly answer Ron’s question since Bush was suppressing dissent prior to 9/11 starting with arresting 15 wheel-chair bound protesters after he, as TX Governor at the time, had expressed support for Olmstead vs. L.C., in which the state of Georgia was sued by two disabled women who wanted to live in communities rather than in an institution.

I really wish my article was still up, I spent alot of time researching it and I should have kept a copy, but alas I didn’t.

Not related to your content, dolphin, but I’ve learned the hard way to keep copies of things I write, so I feel your pain.

RE: Randi Rhodes - http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44025

Yes, it’s from WND, but she’s quoted in there as admitting to and apologizing for it once she got in hot water.

admitting to and apologizing for it once she got in hot water

Shame on her if it’s true. That said, the fact that she apologized still puts her at a higher level than Coulter.

Yes, it’s from WND, but she’s quoted in there as admitting to and apologizing for it once she got in hot water.

Which is far more than Ann Coulter has ever done and again, it was a one-time thing, vs. the routine garbage spewing from Coulter’s mouth. Again, there is no comparison between the two. Coulter is outrageous and no amount of “well, libs are outrageous too!” can make up for that.

And yes, Coulter has always been this way, but pre-9/11 she was taking heat from conservatives and liberals for her vile spew. Now, she’s mainstream.

My point is that Ann Coulter should be shunned, was on her way to being shunned, until 9/11 occurred and a group of people in power saw that there was far more to be gained from a divided country. Yesterday Ann Coulter was a featured guest at some “Freedom Rally” or some such with top conservative pundits like Sean Hannity and G. Gordon Liddy and — get this — a REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, Rudy Giuliani.

She should be shunned, but she’s brought into the fold. Now, why is that?

It’s true. Here’s a mention in the Boston Globe: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/09/10/a_new_low_in_bush_hatred/

As someone who (if I hadn’t been hiding my eyes) could have seen the towers fall from my living room window, who knew people who died in the attacks and even more who worked in the towers but were able to get out before they fell, who was confronted with miles of “missing” flyers on my way to and from work every day for months, who lost a piece of the skyline and a handy orientation device, may I say my life was indeed changed on September 11. And I’d like to point out that both the attempt by the current administration to use my loss to pursue unrelated geopolitical goals and label dissent as treason (which, ironically, has the effect of making the overwhelming majority of the population of NYC traitors), and the attempt by some on the left to deny my loss as part of their dissent dehumanizes and objectifies me and other New Yorkers. There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between you.

Man, I’m glad we’ve had this out. Hearing what people have to say gives me hope. The America that I love and pray for may actually overcome the problem we are now facing.

As our government tells us that we need to fear the terrorists, we are coming to understand that it is our government what we need to fear.

Have you seen that movie, “V for Vendetta”?

I quote: The people should not have to fear their government, the government should fear their people.

God Bless you all. Have a good night.

[…] did it suddenly become “uncool” to commemorate 9/11?  I read a ton of comments and posts this week practically stating that if you are commemorating it, you’re a shameful […]

[…] did it suddenly become “uncool” to commemorate 9/11? I read a ton of comments and posts this week practically stating that if you are commemorating it, you’re a shameful […]

[…] rant that really spoke to me.  Recently, starting the day before 9/11/2007, there were preemptive mockings of what has become the “routine” for many of us on anniversaries of 9/11/01.  I […]

[…] a snippet: When did it suddenly become “uncool” to commemorate 9/11? I read a ton of comments and posts this week practically stating that if you are commemorating it, you’re a shameful […]