9/11 in the post-Bush era

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The Big Al

Meteorologist
Joined
Mar 5, 2005
Messages
3,799
Reaction score
10
Tomorrow is the first anniversary of the September 11th attacks with Obama (anyone besides George W. Bush for that matter) as president. This is a thread to discuss the anniversary and how it's observed in the post-Bush era.

One thing I've noticed is I've yet to see an ad for the year's 9/11 commemorative trinket. In previous years, channels like the Weather Channel are flooded with them. It makes me wonder if it was just another Bush tactic to keep people afraid...or some sicko thought they could cash in on it.
 
That sounds just a bit like a conspiracy theory, Al. I don'T think the Bush administration needed to encourage the sale of commemorative trinkets to remind people of 9-11.
 
The Big Al said:
It makes me wonder if it was just another Bush tactic to keep people afraid...or some sicko thought they could cash in on it.
Click to expand...

...Are you serious? I'm all for kicking Bush, but...c'mon. There are enough GOOD reasons to do it without going down the crazy road.
 
The Big Al said:
It makes me wonder if it was just another Bush tactic to keep people afraid...or some sicko thought they could cash in on it.
Click to expand...

I'm with the others on this one, that's pretty out-there in the realm of possibilities. People reacted on their own after 9/11. No one told the people to protest and shout on 9/12. No one told anyone to donate blood because of 9/11. No one said that everyone had to give more to charity because of 9/11.

But bah, whatever. I'm going to wait and see how Obama and his adminstration handle 9/11 before I form an opinion around it.
 
The one thing that kinda turned me off a little was this mention that 9/11 was a "national day of service".

No. 9/11 is a national day of remembrance. The service came on 9/12. We as a nation have to remember that.
 
I just think it's odd that they came in every year with something to sell on 9/11 and now they don't. I think the Bush comment comes from my belief Bush was trying to delay the healing process as long as possible for political gain. It's most likely an odd coincidence. But what fun are those?:loopy:
 
People will make money off of anything they think will sell. 9/11 was the old event which soon became Obama's Inauguration which was the much more lucrative event since everyone willing to buy 9/11 stuff pretty much had bought it. Those trying to make money off of 9/11 are the same people that were producing plates and t shirts and coins for Obama a few months ago. To think any outside influence had a effect on that is pure insanity.
 
Last edited:
its strange i havent seen a single mention of it on any news shows today here in the UK
 
Arcane Mind said:
The one thing that kinda turned me off a little was this mention that 9/11 was a "national day of service".

No. 9/11 is a national day of remembrance. The service came on 9/12. We as a nation have to remember that.
Click to expand...

Can't it be both? Can't you serve as a way of remembering?
 
GrnMarvl13 said:
Can't it be both? Can't you serve as a way of remembering?
Click to expand...

I think that Arcane's point was that they were trying to market 9/11 as a day of service. 9/12, the day of service, happened because of 9/11, but 9/11 itself was not and is not the day of service.
 
I'm going to have to agree with Phoenicks and the others about this as well. I mean, everyone has their own individual thoughts about the 9/11 tradgedy...whether they think of it in a good er bad way shouldn't matter to the rest of the people in this world...Everyone has their own free will...there's nothing that anyone can do to change that.
If people want to donate blood or volunteer their services to the government, let em!
 
Phoenicks said:
I think that Arcane's point was that they were trying to market 9/11 as a day of service. 9/12, the day of service, happened because of 9/11, but 9/11 itself was not and is not the day of service.
Click to expand...

But didn't people start giving blood on 9/11 (that's certainly what I remember)? Didn't they begin going through the rubble as quickly as possible? I just don't get this big furor over the idea of 9/11 being a day of service. Honestly, does it matter THAT much? No one's saying you HAVE to do anything. No one's saying you CAN'T do anything on 9/12. It's more a continuation. Honoring the dead by doing good instead of JUST mourning. Nothing wrong with mourning, but some people feel the need to do more. Not like anyone has a problem with THAT, so what does it matter what it's called as long as 9/11 is still remembered?

To me...it's a semantics issue, and I'm more annoyed with the people who are so strongly AGAINST this, than anything else. It just...doesn't make sense. It's like debating when to open Christmas presents. Who the hell cares? It's the same result, either way. So why complain? I can understand if this was an attempt at downplaying the events, but it's not. It's an attempt to move on without forgetting. Doing this in honor of those who died. Hell, why not just make the week of 9/11 a WEEK of service?
 
Isn't the Holocaust a lot worse than 9/11? I mean, the former lasted for years, and killed millions under a organized army, leader, etc. Whereas 9/11 lasted for a day, killed thousands, and the people who did it don't even belong to a country; they just do it for teh lulz. TBH, 9/11 may be important to worry about for now, but I bet that in around 60 years, it'll be forgotten for the most part and only be found in history books.
 
Golbat-Man said:
Isn't the Holocaust a lot worse than 9/11? I mean, the former lasted for years, and killed millions under a organized army, leader, etc. Whereas 9/11 lasted for a day, killed thousands, and the people who did it don't even belong to a country; they just do it for teh lulz. TBH, 9/11 may be important to worry about for now, but I bet that in around 60 years, it'll be forgotten for the most part and only be found in history books.
Click to expand...
QFT
 
Well, there are loads of disasters worse than 9/11. Like the tsunami. But how many remembers that just as clearly as 9/11 now (well I do at least). And it was waaaaay much worse than 9/11. Doesn't mean 9/11 wasn't a tragedy, it's just that there have been worse tragedies that that.
 
^QFT

The bombings of Japan were much worse then 9/11. Bush just hyped it up so he could guarantee his second term. He did that with Katrina too.
 
Waffles said:
The bombings of Japan were much worse then 9/11. Bush just hyped it up so he could guarantee his second term. He did that with Katrina too.
Click to expand...

Okay now you are making stuff up, no Bush did not need to hype up 9/11 the very first terrorist attack on our soil, the loss of security, the utter shock was more than enough. To say any differently is pure stupidity.

Yes there has been worse stuff, but none of it is comparable, generations will grow up, new generations will be born that did not experience 9/11 and eventually it will be looked back on through our text books as another event in history like Pearl Harbor.

Have there been events with more deaths? Of course, but that wasn't all what 9/11 was about and to believe so completely neglects the feeling of fear and loss of security that day brought about. With the Tsunami, as bad as that event was it was a natural event, it happened it could be monitored, and it was over with. For those that lived through it, or it happened to their country, yeah it probably is the worst event ever for them. For Americans, the hours and days following 9/11 you had no idea what was happening, no one knew if there were more attacks coming, if the airplane you boarded could be the next hijacked. There was a loss of security, a fear this country had never felt before that makes that day different than a natural disaster.
 
Big Lutz said:
Okay now you are making stuff up, no Bush did not need to hype up 9/11 the very first terrorist attack on our soil, the loss of security, the utter shock was more than enough. To say any differently is pure stupidity.
Click to expand...

"The very first terrorist attack on our soil." For the love of all that's holy, LEARN YOUR HISTORY. It wasn't the first. It wasn't even the first terrorist attack caused by Middle Eastern terrorists. Not on US soil. Is it the worst on US soil to date? Yes. But it WAS NOT THE FIRST. To think it WAS the first is crass ignorance. 1993. 1995. Look those years up. Please. I implore you: Learn. Learn the history of "our" nation.

I'm so fucking sick of people not being able to remember what occurred before 9/11/01. If anything, it proves that people WILL forget this. May take a bigger attack, or more time, but people WILL forget. And that sickens me. And demeans all our vows to "never forget."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom