This is a collection of my responses and thoughts following the multiple bombings of the World Trade Centre and Pentagon in September 2001.
The initial reaction
That's the official line of the BBC, and I'm not going to object one iota. My heartfelt sympathies go out to everyone who has been touched in whatever way by today's events.
I remember the way Britain became a dour, miserable place on the death of Diana just over four years ago, and I don't want that to happen again. We can still laugh. We can still joke. We can still discuss the ins and outs of belly buttons. We're not going to be cowed by faceless terrorists, whoever they are.
It's in that spirit, the spirit that we shall overcome through good humour, that I post on.
It's rare that you'll find me supporting the policies of former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher. She was always a firm believer in picking oneself up, dusting oneself off, and continuing with life after such events. To do anything else - to live in a state of fear, not going round the next corner in case there are nasties there - is a victory for the bullies. It's as true for school bullies as it is for the cowards behind yesterday's atrocities. Stand up, show the world you're better than them.
Group hug, and onward and upward!
Jaeda
someone explain to me exactly *how* someone boarded *our* planes, from *our* airports and used *our* planes to blow up *our* buildings?
I think the open-plan airports have a lot to do with it. In Europe, there's a strict division between Landside, where there are check-in counters and the public has (more-or-less) free access; and Airside, where only those intending to fly shall go. There's a strict dividing line between the two, with heavy security checks. Certainly from the UK, one can expect to have to open one's hand luggage if there's anything metallic in there, and pass through sniffy metal detectors.
To put this another way: coming *off* the plane, passengers are escorted to their baggage carousel, go through customs if needs be, and meet people in the Landside reception area. In the US, people meeting passengers get to go right to the gate. This took me by surprise at Dallas - I was looking for my baggage carousel, not the people I was meeting.
This open access may only be a minute part of the cause, but it's the difference that was noticeable to an ordinary traveller such as myself.
Brendan McCabe:
I think it's very scary how 'pissed' people are. This doesn't have to turn into World War 3, but I'm afraid it will after listening to the radio all day. All this talk of freedom being threatened, and acts of war. I have always found American patriotism a little disturbing. I'm sorry if this makes me a little (more?) unpopular. Many people died. Why is it easier for some to immediately bay for blood instead of seeing the futility of war?
A very good question. For whatever reason, there's a desire for revenge, to make sure that those responsible and their victims are remembered together. This seems very odd to me.
Yes, the family of civilised nations needs to take reasonable steps to ensure that such an atrocity never happens again. The question is what those steps are. Is it firing a Cruise missile at a factory making powdered milk? Is it risking soldiers in a land battle in a far-off country? Indeed, is it blowing a far-off country back to the Stone age?
I grew up hearing about countless people in my country being shot because of some fucking war. And for what? Nothing.
Lest we forget, this war continues. Last month marked the start of the
33rd year of the guerilla war in the British Isles. Over 6000 people have been
killed as a direct result of this conflict. There is yet to be a lasting
solution.
Victoria
I said that I was grateful that it wasn't discovered to be an IRA attack or Brendan would probably be beaten on the street. Her response was to say that Irish people 'lool like us and are like us', so that's different.
Hey, Britain got egg all over her face after sentencing a dozen people to around 15 years in jail for no crime other than having Irish parents and/or accents. Please learn from our mistakes. We do these stupid things so you don't have to.
The majority of Americans, at least the ones shouting 'nuke em!', seem more outraged by the fact that American soil (or in this case air space) was attacked, not that lives were lost or that a war may be starting. They want war.
As I've mentioned before, in Britain we've faced an ongoing terrorist campaign for my entire life. No-one, bar those directly involved, wants it to continue. We've tried declaring war on an entire section of the community. It only made things worse.
paulo:
Mind you, I'm not arguing at all against the right of the U.S. to nuke the culprits (unlike some other people here);
When I started listening fully to the coverage, this was an early reaction. Nuclear weapons may just be used, in an eye-for-an-eye response.
As I'm intimating elsewhere, I think this would be a gross over-reaction. Thousands of people have been killed in New York and Washington for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Why have another massacre of innocents just to prove a point. Does the death toll at Hiroshima and Nagasaki mean nothing?
Over and above this, is it the language of a statesman to talk exclusively in terms of fear and revenge? Blair has been as gung-ho as ever, blurring the line between justice and retribution. I've not managed to catch the US President live, just second and third hand, so I'll decline to comment on his response.
Tom Panarese:
I honestly don't think the US government will resort to using nuclear weapons, probably out of fear of some sort of equal retaliation from someone who thinks we have gone too far and should be stopped
That was my reaction, and that of just about every other talking head that has entered my cranium over the past few days.
The Defense Department has said: The United States will respond to terrorist attacks on New York and Washington with a sustained military campaign.
Let me pose the taxing question. How is this going to lessen the chance of a similar attack in the future? There is huge anti-American sentiment throughout the world. One just has to remember how every country laughed at the US last year when her presidential election descended into farce. Swaggering around the world as if she owned it, imposing her own ideals through the global financial system, intervening in national affairs, are all actions that bring people to dislike the USA. In that climate, will a campaign to take out the person(s) responsible for this week's atrocities lessen that tension, even if it actually removes them?
Let's suppose that the US goes in, all guns blazing. Aircraft and missiles bomb an Arab state, and produce massive casualties. Many of them will be civilians with no ties to terrorists. This will confirm the belief that the United States *is* intent on ending the Islamic world. Out of this mess will come thousands of new volunteers for a renewed anti-American jihad.
To win over peace-minded Muslims, there will have to be more sympathy for their concerns. For example, the plight of ordinary Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. The suffering of the Iraqi civilians who are denied basic goods and medicine due to the economic sanctions.
As I see it, the battle isn't to take out those responsible. It's to prevent such tragic events from happening again. And I'm not convinced that this is on the USA's agenda.
As for the composure of our President ... I'm not this man's biggest fan and I don't think he's coming off particularly well in this situation. Maybe it's because he just doesn't present well.
If anyone's come out of this really well, it's Mayor Giuliani of NYC. He's been brilliant, Senator Rodham-Clinton has been the media poster girl and a familiar face for those of us overseas. Bush has been wooden in his set- pieces.
every time I heard him say something new it just sounded like what he'd said before, but rewritten.
Here's the Presidential joke: Ah, normal service resumes at the Bush House. (:
It's very hard for me not to support a military response
I'm probably showing my pacifist tendencies here, but it's very hard for me to support a military response at any time. This is one of those times when I do question that default response.
Victoria:
The local papers state these facts, but do not condemn them. They enforce the views that it's a Muslim attack instead of a terrorist one. They show pictures of young boys with 'I'm ready for war' written on their chests, holding American flags. The talk of vengeance and war, and then a little about the victimes. People here are rallying for war at all costs.
Have you thought of sending this to them, for publication?
Don't get me wrong....I want protection. But I do not want war. I don't want more innocent people killed. [..] Why should this country do the same?
That's a very good question. I wish I knew the answer.
I am afraid. I am grieving. I feel so much pain for those that died and for those they left behind. But I also feel pain for those that will unjustly suffer from revenge.
This is the worst part of it. Too many innocent people have been killed already. Let me rephrase that sentence. Innocent people have been killed already.
What's needed now is compassion and charity, not anger and violence.
Well argued. Very well argued.
I read the entire paper except the sports page.
Here's what you missed:
All games postponed.
The rest was about vengeance and war. [This] is a big Bush and gun loving state. I've always felt out of place here.
It's shown through, time and time again. Like a fish out of water.
Yes, people feel bad about the victims and want to help, though I must say that people around here are not flocking to give aide. They are just putting out their flags and harassing anyone with dark skin.
Head, meet wall.
acts of kindness are being engulfed in cries for war.
This is what's worrying me, as well. The dunderheads. The humanity. The people acting like they're so superior.
Today a man was apparently dragged from a Greyhound bus on its way from DC by police, handcuffed, and pushed face down on the ground while dogs sniffed his belongings. The man was an Indian doctor, but the bus driver had called into the police that he was a 'suspicious looking Arab'.
Well, I hope he sues the police for every cent they've got. It'll be more profitable than suing for such sense as they have.
I hope that the anger and hate does die down and that people can focus on rebuilding and helping those in need.
Amen to that.
Jaeda:
We, as a country, became complacent, secure in the fact that we were big bad America and no one would attack us. We were terribly wrong. That was our mistake.
I vaguely recall someone on Five Live mentioning Son of Star Wars, the project that would shoot down incoming nuclear missiles, in theory. It wouldn't prevent someone carrying (say) a suitcase full of nerve gas onto the subway. Nor would it prevent someone targetting a plane at a skyscraper high enough to clear surrounding buildings, low enough to cause serious structural damage.
Sending planes full of jet fuel into national American landmarks and killing thousands of people? That was bin Laden's mistake.
Allegedly. According to rumour and innuendo. A clear nomination of the person responsible was totally absent from Friday's debate in the British parliament.
I don't have to allow others to hurt me. And this? This hurt me, directly. This shook me to my core.
This is a very difficult call to make. I haven't decided my position.
How do we get thru day to day when our worlds have gone off axis? I'm not being melodramatic. This has seeped into every crevice of my life.
Take it day to day. You've been through a heck of a lot, and you've not only survived, but you've come out a really wonderful person. You could ask Toby and Caggie for their advice. Cats know more than they like to let on. Heck, go watch your Eminem video collection. (Never thought you'd hear me say *that* :)
My little sister is spouting political opinions.
No way!
The only thing my little sister has ever spouted up to now is "A-W-E-S-O-M-E"
Are you *quite* sure it wasn't "A-W-S-O-M-E!" [ducks for cover (:]
everyone knows what we should (or shouldn't) do....and I don't even know what *I* should do.
No, people are *pretending* they know what to do. They haven't a freakin' clue, just like the rest of us.
it was so surreal at work today...we went to work, ate our donuts...and then realized when we went to go call our customers that some of them aren't there anymore...2 of my accounts were in the WTC and I didn't realize it until I tried to call them and couldn't get thru. These are people I talk to on almost a daily basis....and they're just gone.
From this distance, it's hard to appreciate the little things that ram the message home.
Dallas has gone nuts.
Ah, life gets back to normal in the Metroplex (:
An Irving cop got shot today,
Like that isn't an everyday occurrence. No smiley.
it's just crazy.....and we're going to McDonalds....bizarre.....
The world may be collapsing around our ears, but we can count on three things.
1) People will still go to McDougals.
2) Elmer Fudd is a dolt.
3) At Home Farm, Jennifer is making a cup of tea.
paulo:
It's ironic, because I've spent the better part of this week arguing in spanish websites against knee-jerk leftists who were saying that americans "were asking for it" and that "they have killed lots of people all around the world too".
For the record, such posts have tended to be cogently argued against on Het Grauniad's talkboards, and have been oddly absent from the BBC's boards. I've not looked at usenet.
there's a difference between these things coming from our very own Cory, who is an american and therefore a potential victim, and coming from knee-jerk european leftists sitting comfortably in front of the TV and posting bad taste jokes on the Web.
At the moment, they both have equal access to the US President: as near zero as makes no odds. In time, one of these groups will lead their nation.
(Of course, after I wrote all the above, Jerry Falwell had to come and trash the sympathies I was feeling towards the american cause in this case...)
#You're sick, you're sick, you're sick, you are.
#You're sick, you're sick.#
I was going to write even more about something that I find more worrying, which is the decrease in civil liberties that we'll suffer in the future and the increasing paranoia and policial-state measures, but it's late and I'm tired. Somebody start that thread, if you wish.
That an offer? OK, some clippings. From Saturday's Guradnia:
Blair is now to examine new extradition laws, new mechanisms for international justice in parallel with international criminal court, and a new attack on the financing and laundering of terrorist money.
Although he said he did not have details at this stage, it is known that ministers have not been able to bring charges under the new terrorism laws, and the extradition procedures in the EU are too bureaucratic. Britain is likely to support a new European search-and-arrest warrant, as well as the abolition of the formal extradition procedure between member states.
The home secretary, David Blunkett, also suggested that identity cards could be introduced. Blunkett said the attack on the United States meant that the government would have to consider "how far anyone should expect to go in a democracy in being able to identify, being able to cooperate in terms of surveillance. Those things are very difficult issues but they are ones we are going to have to address if we are going to protect the most basic freedom of all, which is to live in peace without fear."
Blunkett is not thinking of introducing compulsory identity cards or giving the police a new power to demand everyone's personal papers but is to look at a "citizen's access card" which would be voluntary but make it more difficult for someone, whether a terrorist or an illegal migrant, to "disappear" but remain here for a long period of time.
The introduction of such voluntary identity cards is supported by Lord Rooker, the immigration minister, and was backed this year in a cross- party Commons home affairs select committee report as a way of strengthening the UK's border controls.
From Politech:
On Thursday evening, two days after the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, the Senate approved the "Combating Terrorism Act of 2001," which enhances police wiretap powers and permits monitoring in more situations.... Warrantless surveillance appears to be limited to the addresses of websites visited, the names and addresses of e-mail correspondents, and so on, and is not intended to include the contents of communications. But the legislation would cover URLs, which include information such as what Web pages you're visiting and what terms you type in when visiting search engines.
Cory, quoted here almost in full:
I don't mean to imply that Tuesday's events aren't horrific. My soul is sick from them, the power of the tragedy is overwhelming. At the same time, I look around at some of the reactions that I'm seeing, and I'm appalled. I know that people are scared, and that fear makes people violent. However, I don't think that creating more bloodshed is going to solve anything. Politically, I understand that the US is going to go to war over this. I *know* that. But the
way people are talking, as if it's our right as *Americans* not to be terrorized, when we are so often the terrorists, is chilling. It is our right as *humans* to not be terrorized, it is a *human* right to not be killed innocently or have our loved ones killed innocently. And yet, so many people are talking about starting a war that will kill innocents, and someone's loved ones.
This is the question that those in charge of the US, and Europe, really
aren't addressing. How can it be just to go around taking an eye for an
eye? I'm leaning strongly to the opinion that it can't.
So many people are willing to justify our doing *equally horrifying things*--because that's what war is, by nature-- by saying that it is our *right*. Like somehow, we have God on our side and no one else possibly could.
This is the exact same argument that Tuesday's murderers used, at least in self-justification. Does anyone spot something vaguely hypocritical around here?
It's that ignorance that angers me so much, and while I agree that we need to focus on those who have lost loved ones right now, and pull together to just clean up the aftermath of all this, I think it's naive to ignore the danger of all of these retaliatory feelings. If we retaliate, nothing changes. and if nothing changes. . .NOTHING CHANGES.
The evil is still in the world, we'd just be contributing to it.
I know that one way or another, we're going to war. I just hope, probably fruitlessly, that we can do so without the attitude that we do so in absolute, unquestionable right.
I don't want to take away from the validity of the pain people are feeling right now. I just want there to be some kind of lesson from it, and for that lesson to be compassion, because, really. . . I think that even if we go to war, and we kill every single person who was in any way involved, the people who died Tuesday still did so in vain. But if we learn what it feels like to be terrorized, and refuse to continue to instill that pain in other countries, then maybe, *maybe* we will be able to begin to heal.
Europe held a three-minute silence at midday CET today, 11am in Britain. These were my thoughts at the time.
"Order," mutters Mr Speaker.
The Commons rises for three minutes.
The Lords are already standing.
How can I not join them.
It's a beautifully sunny day outside.
Flies are flitting round the washing line
They glint and shine in the sun.
This is a sunny day that so many people were never meant to see.
The clock ticks on.
The traffic noise has died right down.
There are still vehicles moving on the road
I can hear them, but far less than usual.
The clock ticks on.
A fly comes in through the open window.
It buzzes around, bangs its head against the window.
Eventually it flies out.
Normally, I'd ignore the buzzing, or open the window some more.
Right now, it's loud to deafening.
The clock ticks on.
Once a second, another tick.
There's the hum of the traffic, but not a voice to be heard.
Not one voice, even next door's baby is silent.
The clock ticks on.
The Lords sit down, and Paddy Ashdown begins to speak.
His lips are moving, but no sound comes out.
We're with the Commons, still standing.
Still remembering.
Still paying tribute.
"Order," mutters Mr Speaker.
The MPs sit down.
Menzies Campbell begins his speech.
"Rich and varied as the English language is, it doesn't contain words to describe Tuesday's atrocity..."
No, Nostradamus, did NOT predict Tuesday's tragedy:
Independent studies have concluded that Nostradamus did, in fact, predict that a massive alien attack force would attempt to take over the world by holding world leaders to ransom.
Nostradamus failed to predict that the aliens would make two small mistakes:
1) The world is not led by Quentin Throcket of Market Harborough, Leicestershire.
2) Sending your attack force as small winged craft with yellow-and-black stripes means that they will get mistaken for insects.
The upshot was that the alien's attack was mistaken by Quentin Throcket for a bee sting, then the entire fleet was wiped out by a queen bee, annoyed that some other hive was trying to drink her nectar.
Quentin Throcket's hand has completed a full recovery.