Archive through September 10, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archive: Disgusted with September 11 hype:
Archive through September 10, 2002
Hillbilly | Thursday, September 05, 2002 - 07:56 am     Maris...you have my vote! I can't believe I actually agree with you about something!  |
Goddessatlaw | Thursday, September 05, 2002 - 09:38 am     Amen, amen, amen, amen, amen Maris! |
Melfie1222 | Thursday, September 05, 2002 - 12:33 pm     Loppes, my post to Whit4you last night was not intended to belittle or condescend, just to question. I didn't understand the point of posting that photo, and I don't understand the idea that someone referring to anything about 9/11 as hype must be trying to forget or avoid out of fear, guilt or denial. I respected Whit4you's reply and her opinion while I also respectfully disagree. However you define hype, I personally don't get how someone would not feel a little disgusted by some of the examples mentioned earlier. To use the 9/11 cupcakes example again - to me that is just plain weird if not downright wrong. As for the photos, for me the images of that day are burned into my memory - it does not take looking at another photo of the towers collapsing to sustain my grief and anger and sympathy for those who were personally affected. |
Jville | Friday, September 06, 2002 - 12:57 pm     September 11 was the day everything changed. Everyone said so, and some still do. This Wednesday, CBS's special commemoration will be called 'The Day That Changed America'. Fox, slightly less passive, has gone with 'The Day America Changed'. But the best proof that nothing has changed are the networks' day-that-everything-changed specials themselves. The other day I warned against the Dianafication of September 11. But I was too late. Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer, Connie Chung and the rest of the all-star sob-sisters will be out in force with full supporting saccharine piano accompaniment. The most disturbing footage - the planes slicing through the building, 200 people jumping to their deaths, the thud of bodies landing on the lobby roof - will not be shown. The networks have decided our anger needs to be managed. It's a very September 10 commemoration of September 11. Much of the stuff that was alleged to have 'changed' never did except in the mind of addlepated media gurus: Irony is dead! Columnists wrote columns about it. And TV producers put vox-pops together with folks who agreed there was no irony to be found. And then people wrote columns ironically commenting on the irony-is-dead TV items. And, pretty soon, irony had snuck back in. And, before you know it, the pneumatic widow Anna Nicole Smith got her own reality show on MTV. None of this matters. Most Americans don't watch Anna Nicole. I can't get MTV, never see it. But, if I could get it, whether or not I watched would be unconnected to the events of September 11. Nations do not change in a day. The day-everything-changed myth was a convenience. It enabled the media, for example, to explain why the guy they'd dismissed as an idiot for the last year seemed to be handling things okay. If this was the day that changed America, then it must have changed him, too: he'd been 'transformed'; he's 'grown in office'. (This narrative has now been discarded: the Bush dummy jokes are back, the cartoonists have re-shrunk him in office, drawing him once more as a small preppy schoolboy way too teeny for the Oval Office chair.) Bush, of course, was unchanged. He reacted to September 11 just as anyone who'd paid him any heed since 1999 would have expected him to. His view of the world was reinforced by 9/11, not shattered. The change that occurred on September 11 was a simple one. When Osama bin Laden blew up the World Trade Center, he also blew up the polite fictions of the pre-war world. At Ground Zero, they've been working frantically to clear away the rubble. Likewise, at the UN, EU and all the rest, they've also been working frantically not so much to clear away the mess but to stick it back together and reconstruct the great fantasy world as it existed on 10 September, that bizarro make-believe land where Nato is a 'mutual defence alliance' and Egypt and Saudi Arabia are 'our staunch friends'. Even in America, some people are still living in that world. You can switch on the TV and hear apparently sane 'experts' using phrases like 'Bush risks losing the support of the Arab League'. The easiest way to understand how little has changed is to consider the two UN conferences in South Africa which bookend the year. The weekend before 9/11, at the UN Conference Against Racism, Colonialism, Whitey, Hymie and Capitalism, Robert Mugabe's government was cheered to the rafters for calling on Britain and America to 'apologise unreservedly for their crimes against humanity'. Last week, when the world's jetset Luddites convened at the Church of the Sustainable Conception for the so-called Earth Summit, who got the biggest roar this time? Why, ol' Starver Bob, for a trenchant assault on the wickedness of Tony Blair. A few weeks earlier, Libya was elected to chair the UN Human Rights Commission. Washington doesn't expect much from the UN, but why did it have to be Libya? Okay, it's never going to be America or Britain, but how about Belize or Western Samoa? Why did it have to be something so utterly contemptible of reality as the elevation of Colonel Gaddafi's flunkey? If the multilateral world is irrelevant, it's because its organs - the UN, EU, Nato - are diseased and sclerotic, and it has shown no willingness in the last year to address the fact. Does that mean Bush is a unilateralist? Not at all. Bilateralism is booming. Since September 11, US-Russian, US-Chinese, US-Indian and US-Turkish relations have all improved, all of which are arguably more important than whether Washington sees eye to eye with Chris Patten. Only a very blinkered, self-absorbed Eurocentric would assume that because Mr Bush (as quoted in The Spectator last week) doesn't 'give a shit about the Europeans', he doesn't give a shit about anyone else: within a year, for example, the US has built productive relations with the Central Asian republics. As for Europe, for the next couple of decades it will be too preoccupied saving itself to do much on the world stage: the EU faces a declining birth-rate, rising social costs, a swelling unassimilated immigrant population - all the indicators heading in the wrong direction. Islam For All reported approvingly the other day that, at present demographic rates, in 20 years' time the majority of Holland's children (those under 18) will be Muslim. It will be the first Islamic country in western Europe since the loss of Spain. Europe is the colony now. So, whether or not the world changed, America's relationship with it did. A year on, there's still no agreement as to the meaning of 11 September. To some of us, it was an act of war. To Guardian columnists, it was the world's biggest 'but': yes, it was regrettable, BUT it was also a logical consequence of America's 'cowboy arrogance' blah blah. To the Muslims who celebrated openly in Ramallah and in Denmark and at Concordia University in Montreal, it was the most spectacular victory in a long conflict stretching back through Osama's ever greater provocations of the Nineties to 23 October 1983, when Hezbollah suicide bombers killed 300 American and French soldiers in Beirut and drove the Great Satan out of Lebanon. To other Muslims, it was obviously the work of Mossad. To John Lahr, theatre critic of the New Yorker, it was possibly the work of George W. Bush trying to distract attention from Democrat criticism of his missile-defence plans. When an opinion-former's caught unawares, he retreats to his tropes, however lame, as Lahr did, and Pilger, Chomsky et al. But the clearest way to understand the meaning of the day is to look at those who were called upon to act rather than theorise. We now know that the fourth plane, United Flight 93, the one that crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, was heading for the White House. Had they made it, it would have been the strike of the day. It might have killed the Vice-President and who knows who else, but, even if it hadn't, think of the symbolism: the shattered façade, smoke billowing from a pile of rubble on Pennsylvania Avenue, just like the money shot in Independence Day. Those delirious Palestinians and Danes and Montrealers would have danced all night. That they were denied their jubilation is because the dopey hijackers assigned by al-Qa'eda to Flight 93 were halfway across the continent before they made their move and started meandering back east. By the time the passengers began calling home on their cellphones, their families knew what had happened in New York. Unlike those on the earlier flights, the hostages on 93 understood they were aboard a flying bomb intended to kill thousands of their fellow citizens. They knew there would be no happy ending. So they gave us the next best thing, a hopeful ending. Todd Beamer couldn't get through to anyone except a telephone company operator, Lisa Jefferson. She told him about the planes that had smashed into the World Trade Center. Mr Beamer said they had a plan to jump the guys and asked her if she would pray with him, so they recited the 23rd psalm: 'Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me....' Then he and the others rushed the hijackers. At 9.58 a.m., the plane crashed, not into the White House, but in some pasture outside Pittsburgh. As UPI's James Robbins wrote, 'The Era of Osama lasted about an hour and half or so, from the time the first plane hit the tower to the moment the General Militia of Flight 93 reported for duty.' Exactly. The most significant development of September 11 is that it marks the day America began to fight back: 9/11 is not just Pearl Harbor but also the Doolittle Raid, all wrapped up in 90 minutes. No one will ever again hijack an American airliner with boxcutters, or, I'll bet, with anything else - not because of predictably idiotic new Federal regulations, but because of the example of Todd Beamer's ad hoc platoon. Faced with a novel and unprecedented form of terror, American technology (cellphones) combined with the oldest American virtue (self-reliance) to stop it cold in little more than an hour. The passengers of Flight 93 were the only victims who knew what the hijackers had in store for them, and so they rose up, and began the transformation of Osama into a has-bin Laden. Al-Qa'eda might yet come up with something new, but invention and improvisation are the hallmarks of a dynamic culture, not a stagnant one like Islamofascism. Flight 93 foreshadowed the innovations of the Afghan campaign, when men in traditional Uzbek garb sat on horses and used laser technology to guide USAF bombers to their targets. The B2s dropped their load and flew back to base - Diego Garcia or Mississippi. The 'Vietnam-style quagmire' crowd made the mistake of assuming the Pentagon is as institutionally resistant to fresh ideas as the average Ivy League faculty or American op-ed page. The Flight 93 hijackers might have got lucky. They might have found themselves on a plane with John Lahr ('You guys are working for Bush, right?') or an Ivy League professor immersed in a long Harper's article about the iniquities of US foreign policy. They might have found themselves travelling with Robert Daubenspeck of White River Junction, Vermont, who the day after September 11 wrote to my local newspaper advising against retaliation: 'Someone, someday, must have the courage not to hit back but to look them in the eye and say, "I love you.'' ' But, granted these exceptions, chances are any flight full of reasonably typical Americans would have found a group of people to do the right thing, to act as those on Flight 93 did. When you face these terrorists, when you 'look them in the eye', you see there's nothing to negotiate. Flight 93's passengers were the first to confront that - to understand that what they were up against was not 'courage' (as I erroneously identified it a year ago) but a psychotic death-cultism in which before committing mass murder one carefully depilates and cleans one's genitalia because paradise is a brothel. They are dangerous only insofar as they're used by wily dictators, cheered on by their fellow Muslims and regarded ambivalently by much of the rest of the world. But, on Flight 93, Todd Beamer, Jeremy Glick, Thomas Burnett, Mark Bingham and others did not have the luxury of amused Guardianesque detachment. So they effectively inaugurated the new Bush Doctrine: when you know your enemies have got something big up their sleeves, you take 'em out before they can do it. Everything that mattered after September 11 - Bush's moral clarity, the decision to hit back hard, the spirit of innovation, and the crystal-clear understanding that this is an enemy beyond negotiation -was present in the final moments of Flight 93. They're the bedrock American values, the ones you don't always see because everyone's yakking about Anna Nicole or the new 'reality-based' 'Beverly Hillbillies'. But we know that, like the Minutemen of the Revolutionary War, when you need them in a hurry they're always there. Bush will need them in the years ahead because he has chosen to embark on the most ambitious change of all, a reversal of half a century of US policy in the Middle East. After the War of 1812, the British eventually concluded that neither they nor anyone else could ever win against the Americans. Size and distance made it uniquely secure. That changed on 11 September, and George W. Bush has never been in any doubt about the 'root cause': the lack of liberty in the Middle East. The polite fictions - Prince Abdullah is 'moderate', Yasser Arafat is our 'partner in peace', the Syrian Foreign Minister is as respectable as Norway's - will no longer do. They led to slaughter. So the Bush Doctrine of pre-emption is potentially the most profound change in international relations in generations. Europe, for one, hasn't caught up to it: when it comes to Saddam, the Continentals are like the passengers on those first three planes; they're thinking he's a rational guy, just play it cool and he won't pull anything crazy. But America learned the hard way: it's the world of September 10th that's really crazy. The Spectator (U.K.) 09/07/2002 By Mark Steyn New Hampshire |
Babyruth | Friday, September 06, 2002 - 07:01 pm     'American Idol' Star Wants to Withdraw From Sept. 11 Event By ALEX KUCZYNSKI N.Y.Times Pop queen for one day, and already Kelly Clarkson is stepping into controversy. Ms. Clarkson, 20, the former comedy-club waitress who triumphed on "American Idol" Wednesday night, has snagged a record contract, a deal with Creative Artists Agency, concert bookings and a single, which is due to arrive on Sept. 17. But today, in an interview with The New York Times, she said she wanted to withdraw from one obligation her new management company, 19 Management, has lined up for her: a performance of the national anthem at a Sept. 11 commemoration at Lincoln Memorial in Washington. A Washington-based charity, Champions of Hope, had made a deal with 19 Entertainment, one of the producers of the "American Idol" show, for whoever won the competition to sing the national anthem at the organization's "United Day of Service" ceremony on Sept. 11. at the National Mall. The news spurred criticism that the producers of "American Idol," which attracted 23 million viewers for the show's finale, were turning a day of national mourning into a giant promotional opportunity. Today, Ms. Clarkson said, "I think maybe it's a bad idea." "If anybody thinks I'm trying to market anything, well, that's awful," she added. "I am not going to do it." Executives at Fox Television last week began to distance themselves from the deal made by the producers of "Idol." One senior Fox executive, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said a performance that day could be seen as exploitative. "I hope she reconsiders that one," the executive said. Melissa Helmbrecht, the founder of Champions of Hope, a group that organizes young people to volunteer for community service, said that Ms. Clarkson was still on board. "She's still scheduled to sing," Ms. Helmbrecht said this afternoon. Ms. Helmbrecht said that news stations have inquired about covering the event but that it is not scheduled to be broadcast on any specific network. It is open to the public, she said, and no tickets are to be sold. Tom Ennis, who runs 19 Management, a division of 19 Entertainment Ltd., based in London, said Friday that he would overrule Ms. Clarkson's decision. So she would indeed sing the anthem on Sept. 11? "Yes," he said. |
Reader234 | Friday, September 06, 2002 - 07:50 pm     Whit... Thank you for reminding me with the pic. I do not live near New York. I was not "directly" affected... and I so want to block out that I am "indirectly" affected. I dont want to, and I cannot watch the poignant stories that have to be told. Somehow, I cannot distance myself when I hear the stories of survivors. Or of the flt 93 (today I heard that the Verizon operator that talked and prayed with Todd Beamer, she couldnt hang up the phone, after 10min of hearing silence, her supervisor told her it was time to hang up. The finality of it breaks my heart, I keep putting myself in her place, or in the place of so many other heroes, the Pentagon stories, the... on and on...) Yesterday our principal gave us the letter he intended to send out. The school is a small K-6 school. He wanted to prepare parents, and staff. We would follow the suggestions of the President, and at noon, wherever we were he would come on the intercom and we'd do the Pledge. And he contacted the local Fire Dept and they will come on Friday and receive whatever each class made for our "local heroes". He wants to caution us that everyone grieves" differently,,,etc. Well, the more we talked, "can we do the Pledge outside?" Can we have taps, what about if we let... and that is when it hit me. Simple, dignified, and yet... we cannot let it go by. It is too big, much bigger than *I* can grasp. |
Vanillarose | Friday, September 06, 2002 - 11:44 pm     Ocean, I agree with everything you've said. We have to go forward, as a nation, yet it seems the media won't let us. They keep throwing something in our faces that none of us will ever, ever forget. We will never forget the thousands of victims who died that day. Remembering the victims, and the horror and the heroism of that day doesn't mean we should not go forward, and begin to heal, as a nation. I've been disgusted with much of the media coverage of 9/11 thoughout this year. It seems that they are out to get as much mileage out of the event as possible, with tributes, news coverage, images, reminders...you name it. I think a few minutes silent reflection, with nothing to accompany it, would be much more appropriate in memory of the victims than more images of the WTC towers, the horrified, unbelieving faces of New Yorkers, concert tributes, maudlin music, etc. One more point, if we continue to isolate ourselves as a nation, see ourselves as a nation of victims, and if we continue to refuse to move past the horrific events of 9/11, we will have given the terrorists a moral victory. JMHO. |
Alegria | Saturday, September 07, 2002 - 01:59 am     The hype surrounding the upcoming one-year marker of the worst act of terrorism on US soil has been hard to deal with and even harder to ignore. There has been this huge loss of life; the creation of a huge hole in the ground in one of the most vital and dynamic places that almost everyone has a strong pull and connection to - how do we come to terms with that? The hype and packaging is all about commercialism. It is an attempt to control how that event is remembered and manage our reactions. Anytime there is a clip with a canned orchestral in the background which is designed to crank up my emotional response I cringe and feel alienated because it is not authentic. Each of us was affected in a communal and individual sense by the tragedy. For me it created a new awareness of our vulnerability and had me thinking long and deep about how to face the future knowing that unthinkable things like that could be possible. It made me think of war torn regions and how they deal with that reality as their reality, day in and day out. I felt ashamed for living in such an insulated way and, for a time, had a greater sense of connection and compassion for what that must be like. It is easy to slip back into complacency and, since I don't live near New York or Washington and deal with that ongoing sense of still being a target, my concept of personal safety has been restored. BUT when I see clips & stories about the Middle East I am seriously engaged and realize that these conflicts are unfolding rivers of loss, waste and pain and wonder why there is not some huge comprehension regarding how striving for peace and resolution is the only solution. The madness has to end. Considering how huge the US is, trying to get a grasp on how to share as a community in memorializing and remembering and supporting those in the front line who suffered the most is an incredible challenge. Grieving is essentially an intimate and private process. With Sept. 11th, the whole nation has to grapple with how to participate as a community. Personally, I shrink from any commercialism related to that day and always have. But that's just me. |
Bbtimes3 | Saturday, September 07, 2002 - 07:03 pm     All I know is I still cry when I come across something regarding September 11, 2001. (I'm a huge NASCAR fan and tonight there was a special opening for the race relating to that because next weekend's race would be after 9/11. It wasn't done for marketing purposes because NASCAR fans are still going to watch NASCAR by the way and the race is also shown on TNT against college football, etc.) Just like all of you, I still remember where I was at and what I was doing once I realized what was actually happening. I'm 30 years old and before this the major moments of history in my life had been the explosion of the space shuttle and the attempted assassination of President Reagan. I believe that each of us handles something like this in our own way and I believe that is fine. Because there is nothing that any of us can do that will get us away from the way we felt that day. (Personally, I was at work a whole 2000 miles away and we were all crying with the AM radio on listening to reports while having to work at the same time. None of us at work are wanting to go to work on Wednesday.) I don't believe 9/11 should be commercialized but when you think about it, (and I'm playing devil's advocate here) WWI was commercialized, WWII was commercialized, the Vietnam War was commercialized, the Gulf War was commercialized...that is the nature of our society. Without commercialization and the ability to do what we wanted to do, our society would not be regarded as a republican society. (ed: Republican not referring to party affiliation but our society.) Even Hitler and Mussolini knew the benefits of commercialization to push a point (though theirs were much more forceful than ours). We are what makes this country what it is. We have a say as to what's going on with our government. Naivete and disinformation is not an excuse. It is up to each and every one of us to make our own decisions as to what we feel is right. There are many places to find different points of opinion and new facts out there and some of them may not be pushed in our faces. We have to search them out. This Wednesday, the important thing is that we come together and acknowledge the fact that because we, the USA, is one of the superpowers in the world we will be targeted and we won't be put down. We deserve to be a superpower and some countries resent that fact. We have to be strong and fight back regardless of whether others will fight with us either because of their disconcertation and/or anxiety. You (as a country) are either with us or against us. Simple as that. All I know is whether you decide to fly your flag at half-staff, drive with your headlights on, wear a ribbon on your shirt, or even buy cupcakes decorated in red, white, and blue - everything that is done is a sign of patriotism and solidarity (and even buying those cupcakes contribute to our nation's economic state for the moment.) I never really knew patriotism until September 11, 2001. I'm glad that there is patriotism now. JMHO |
Suitsmefine | Saturday, September 07, 2002 - 09:28 pm     I don't care how we do it ....but unless you honestly just do not get, that they wanted to destroy US and EVERYTHING that UNITED STATES stands for, then don't, but the rest of us will....whether it be by prayer, by saluting the American Flag, or simply a moment of silence ...I hope every day that we remember, and we stand behind the men and women who are STILL defending us. You seem to think that 9-11 is over ...move on, well excuse me....I'll move on when the troops are home and my children and yours can feel safe again, most of us were not alive to witness Pearl Harbor, but my grandfather fought in that war, so don't tell me to move on... when something effects this nation it effects each and everyone of us for generations....I will forever remember the moment that second plane went into the WTC....I saw it , and I know that the one thing I couldn't forget was OMG, all those people...and their families....I have lost many dear members of my family over the years, but to loose one in a tragedy like this...it does not even seem imagineable, I will pray for those families,and our great nation on 9-11 as I do EVERYDAY that God grants me life...... |
Ocean_Islands | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 09:24 am     First lady urges limits on 9/11 coverage By Laurence McQuillan, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — First lady Laura Bush says television networks should show restraint this week when broadcasting images of last year's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center because the trauma is still "so raw" for most Americans, particularly children. She also advises parents to shield youngsters from the graphic scenes by either turning off the TV or taking young children out of the room. Laura Bush talks with USA TODAY in an interview held in the first-floor library at the White House. By Tim Dillon, USA TODAY "It'll be a very emotional time. It's already starting to be," Bush said in an interview with USA TODAY. "There's already been a lot of television coverage and newspaper stories about the day. I think it will be several weeks of a very emotional time for all of us. (Related: First lady urges acts of kindness). "People need to be very careful about making sure their children don't see it so often and certainly make sure younger children don't watch it at all," she said. "A lot of children will be confused with it and think it is current." The first lady said it's important for the nation to experience "a time of remembrance ... and mourning" for the almost 3,000 people killed last Sept. 11. She accompanies President Bush on Wednesday when he visits Ground Zero in New York, the Pentagon and the crash site of United Flight 93 near Shanksville, Pa. "In some ways, it seems like a long time since Sept. 11th, but in a lot of ways it is so fresh, so raw," she said. "I think that's what we're going to find on the anniversary." All the major television networks plan daylong coverage of the anniversary Wednesday. Bush says they should limit showing particularly vivid images, such as the hijacked jets crashing into the World Trade Center and the collapse of the twin towers, scenes shown repeatedly a year ago. "I think they should. I hope they will," she said. "I mean, not just show it over and over and over." At the least, Bush suggested that network anchors "warn their viewing audience before they show something, so parents can turn the television off or walk out of the room with their children." Although each network will determine its own policy, the industry is aware of the impact of the horrific scenes on the public. A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll taken last week asked Americans whether the networks should show scenes of the towers collapsing on Sept. 11. Though 54% said yes, a sizeable 43% said no. "I can speak confidently that all of us are sensitive to this and share the same concerns the first lady has raised," said Brian Williams, an anchor for NBC and MSNBC. "We, too, have children. We, too, worry about the impact on them." At the same time, Williams said, "we have to balance the legitimate interests" for showing the scenes. "Six months ago, the reasons (for showing the graphic images) weren't as strong as they will be on the anniversary." He said there may be value in giving viewers advance notice. "We've done that in the past," he says. Network officials note that they have refrained from broadcasting grisly scenes from the tragedy, such as video images of victims plunging to their deaths to escape the World Trade Center inferno. TV audiences in other parts of the world have been exposed to those images. Studies done after the Oklahoma City bombing have found that children were traumatized by watching television coverage of that event. "Children are more vulnerable than adults," said Grace Christ, an expert on childhood trauma at Columbia University who has spent the past year working with the widows and families of New York City firefighters killed on Sept. 11. She offered this advice to parents: "Monitor the degree of exposure your children are having, and think about whether it is really useful to them or not. Be conscious of the fact that some images are more stressful for them, such as the towers and the destruction and the damage. There may be other images of memorials or personal stories that are less violent, less scary. "Generally, kids can tolerate intense emotions for only brief periods of time," Christ said. Mindy Fullilove, a professor of clinical psychiatry at New York State Psychiatric Institute and a founder of NYC Recovers, a coalition of social groups formed to deal with the aftermath of the attacks, said it's good to think about the anniversary and the emotions it may stir. "You can get too mired in this very sad occasion," she said. "What we need are new images ... of the real heroes" — the spouses of those killed a year ago who are trying to keep themselves and their families going. |
Crazydog | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 09:41 am     I wouldn't exactly say I'm disgusted with the hype. I think it was a terrible thing and there should be some sort of recognition of it. What I am a little irritated with, however, is the over-sensationalism of it. I was in a doctor's office waiting to be seen and Oprah was on the TV, today, 9/9. They had a story about a husband and wife. The wife worked for Cantor Fitzgerald. The husband worked in the other tower and was supposed to have a meeting at the Windows on the World restaurant that morning. For some reason he stayed home that day. The wife survived but was badly burned and ultimately survived. The thing that disgusted me the most was when they had the husband talking, they showed black and white "dramatic recreations" of him looking despondently out their apartment window for his wife. Then as he talked about how he kept calling her number, they had another recreation of him on the phone, frantically pacing around their apartment. I thought these recreations were in extremely poor taste. How many people went through the exact same thing but didn't have their loved one saved? To recreate these scenes of someone desperately searching for their loved one simply to make the program more dramatic and heartwrenching was just plain wrong. |
Marysafan | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 09:55 am     Wow, Carazydog. You hit the nail on the head. |
Oregonfire | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 10:25 am     The two-hour special on 60 Minutes last night was very well done. They covered 9-11 from a number of angles, and were not excessively maudlin, IMO. I like that they talked to the unpopular NYC fire commissioner and the Saudi Arabian foriegn minister, among others. Comprehensive coverage that deserves an award. |
Bridgetlovesbb | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 03:07 pm     I live (and have for 22 years) in Oklahoma City and each year on April 19th (the anniv. of the bombing) it is painful for a lot of people to "relive" it. The pictures, the shows, the articles.... Some people want to (myself included) heal without the "hype" of the tragedy shoved in their faces EVERYWHERE we go. I feel the same about September 11th. I dont plan on watching any of the coverage. As with the OKC bombing I think it reopens ALOT of wounds that arent yet even HEALED! My husband heard 2 survivors of 9/11 saying virtually the same thing in an interview. As far as supporting the USA, fine for some....but I am in support of the world. Not all of their activities but in EVERY country there are people suffering every second from war, disease, famine, and SO much more. And I know that some are my spiritual brothers and sisters. So for ME, a US flag isnt appropriate. (and I said FOR ME.) Is there a 'world flag'? LOL Pleae dont flame me This is JUST MY OPINION! |
Dahli | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 03:55 pm     "...but I am in support of the world" Very well said Bridget, I second that and feel that the problems will remain and only increase until that is the what everyone sees .....the world is but one country and mankind its citizens |
Car54 | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 04:08 pm     I am just trying to stay away from the news and other media this week. I feel such a sense of dread and fear about being immersed in this again. I understand the need to mourn and remember, and I don't think there is any way NOT to do those things, but I just cannot stand the constant coverage again. |
Babyruth | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 05:44 pm     Car, that's how I feel, too. I turned on the Today show this AM, and they were showing a rerun of their coverage of 9-11! People screaming in the streets, the planes...I turned it off immediately. I was too immersed in it last year and just can't stand it all over again. Do they really think anyone will forget??? Don't they know kids are up in the morning? |
Ocean_Islands | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 07:53 pm     They only care about money. That's all they care about. It might as well be the OJ Simpson trial all over again. |
Babyruth | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 08:37 pm     A cartoon depicts the media hype:
 |
Oregonfire | Monday, September 09, 2002 - 09:22 pm     Great cartoon, Babyruth! I found last year that I had to pick and choose my moments to feel sad about 9-11. I had three classes starting that I had to teach; I had to be together, strong, and the leader. Wallowing in emotion was a bit of a luxury. This year at last I have more time on my hands, but I think I'll still "self-censor" by giving my attention to what I can, and turning the channel or turning off what I cannot. |
Ocean_Islands | Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 08:19 am     Russian composer creates musical about Sept. 11 VIENNA, Austria (AP) --Sergei Dreznin knows it's risky to debut a musical about September 11 on the anniversary of the attacks. However, Dreznin, a Moscow-born composer who lives in New York City, says he couldn't resist capturing how the spirit of New York has endured. He felt compelled as an artist, he says, "to tell the most important story that could possibly be told." "Vienna-New York Retour," which premieres Wednesday at Vienna's Metropol Theater, chronicles the destruction of the World Trade Center and the aftermath through the eyes of Suzanne, a struggling young singer who lands a dream role on Broadway on the eve of the attacks. Director Jesse Webb, a native of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, who now lives in Berlin, said he had to overcome initial misgivings about the piece, which makes its U.S. debut later this year in Washington, D.C. "When Sergei first approached me, I told him, 'You can't do this. You can't write a musical about September 11,' " Webb said. "Then I realized that a lot of people have never really processed what happened. It just sat there in their subconscious. We've been careful not to wallow in the sentimental aspect of the attack. We just want to offer a means for dealing with it." |
Nimtu | Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 09:05 am     I do understand the feelings that some of you have regarding the various ways in which 9/11 is being remembered. However, I think it's important that it is remembered. I have spent the past 20 years working with the terminally ill and counseling families after the death. One of the single most important things in grief work is the knowledge that you are not alone..that other people have similar feelings and behaviors as you. It is also very important to many to tell their story over and over again - and that people are willing to listen over and over again. We all have one commonality - we die. This was a horrible tragedy and it's hard to watch and think about - but for some it would be unthinkable that their loved ones or their own personal experience in being ignored. As far as advertisers - it has been my understanding that there will be no commercials shown on 9/11. |
Laluna | Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 09:12 am     Terror threat raised to Orange. Check CNN or any other news source. |
Babyruth | Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 09:36 am     I wish I could figure out if this "Orange" is real or not. With Ashcroft and Rumsfeld, their claims as to terrorist threats are like "The Boy who Cried Wolf". Is it hype/propaganda/furthering the pro-war agenda as they have previously, or is there really a reason today to be on higher alert? They've watered down their own system. I hate having to feel cynical like this, but they've promoted such suspicion. |
|