The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Sept 12, 2008 16:55:11 GMT -5
So if I said I hate radical (n-word), it would be okay for me to use the racial slur since I used the word "radical"?
Hating Al Qaeda members is okay. Using the term "towelhead" isn't okay, even if you're using it to describe Al Qaeda members.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 12, 2008 16:58:53 GMT -5
strummer wrote: You say this as if your bigotry isn't the reason for the first thread closing.
Where did I say that? I said "We've" .... I was clearly one of the "we" involved in the closing of the first thread, although I was argue inappropriately. Either way, it came well after my controversial comments. Clearly I then said "a couple of you are on the way ...." here. Clearly I am not one of those involved in such a dispute now. Dude, the smart thing for you to do would be to leave the board for couple of days. I have no idea why the mods haven't banned you, but you should look on that as an act of extreme charity. Antagonizing people who are already very annoyed with you is not the best thanks for such charity. |
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Sept 12, 2008 17:27:32 GMT -5
This may be ill-received, but I've never believed we should rebuild on that site. It is, in many respects, the 21st Century's Pearl Harbor and should be left as a scar so we never forget.
By the same token, the airplanes hitting the towers should be shown at least once a month on television.
|
|
FewFAC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,032
|
Post by FewFAC on Sept 12, 2008 17:32:16 GMT -5
On Edit: Incidentally, it ISN'T bigotry to have a seething hatred for groups of people that hate us and would do us harm. I'm not going to open that can of worms again, but my last comment on the subject was that I clearly used the word "radical." That alone made sure to whom I was referring. Ironically, it IS unchristian. Cause I know how much faith you have. |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Sept 12, 2008 17:43:20 GMT -5
strummer wrote: You say this as if your bigotry isn't the reason for the first thread closing.
Where did I say that? I said "We've" .... I was clearly one of the "we" involved in the closing of the first thread, although I was argue inappropriately. Either way, it came well after my controversial comments. Clearly I then said "a couple of you are on the way ...." here. Clearly I am not one of those involved in such a dispute now. Dude, the smart thing for you to do would be to leave the board for couple of days. I have no idea why the mods haven't banned you, but you should look on that as an act of extreme charity. Antagonizing people who are already very annoyed with you is not the best thanks for such charity. I'd like to reiterate that this is the person who cited URBAN DICTIONARY---a write-in-your-own-definition-and-then-vote-on-them humor site---as a legitimate authority. I'm still stunned by that. That "dictionary" has entries that aren't even words. |
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Sept 12, 2008 18:36:09 GMT -5
Honest question - how important is this to those outside the Boston-NYC-Washington corridor? Not diminishing anything about 9/11 or those who were most affected by it, but other than the annual holiday and the national security/foreign policy implications, I really don't give much thought to Daniel Libeskind, Larry Silverstein or the Freedom Tower. I'd even ask how important it is to those even inside the Metroliner-area. Catching Osama Bin Laden or Al-Zawihiri would be a much better symbol for being able to "move on" than a giant tower. That said, HiFi's a moron. |
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Sept 12, 2008 20:33:24 GMT -5
This may be ill-received, but I've never believed we should rebuild on that site. It is, in many respects, the 21st Century's Pearl Harbor and should be left as a scar so we never forget. By the same token, the airplanes hitting the towers should be shown at least once a month on television. If you're comparing it to our reaction to Pearl Harbor, then we should rebuild the towers and make them bigger and better than before. Almost all the ships that were sunk at Pearl Harbor were raised from the mud, rebuilt (often with improved designs), and sent back into service. Despite the huge number of ships that were damaged that day, only three were lost for good (the Arizona, Oklahoma, and Utah, and the latter was already an obsolete training hulk). The Japanese ships that fought that day didn't fare as well. By the end of the war, every single Japanese ship that sailed with the fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor had been sunk. In a nice twist of irony, the last surviving ship was sunk by an air attack while it was moored at its harbor. So if we're going to take Pearl Harbor as our inspiration, we'd build bigger and better towers on the WTC site, and hunt down and kill every Al Qaeda member who was involved in the planning of the attack. So although you got the specifics of emulating Pearl Harbor wrong, your basic idea of emulating our response to that attack is a bloody good one. |
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 12, 2008 20:52:15 GMT -5
Many have suggested rebuilding WTC I and II as they were. The problem is that Larry Silverstein opposed the idea and wants to limit future liability claims should the building be subject to another incident.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Sept 13, 2008 1:23:04 GMT -5
Many have suggested rebuilding WTC I and II as they were. The problem is that Larry Silverstein opposed the idea and wants to limit future liability claims should the building be subject to another incident. The bigger problem is that no one wants to work in those big tall buildings. If they were re-built as they were, they would be empty. That is the reality. They've been attacked twice already. Time to do something different. |
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 13, 2008 12:14:39 GMT -5
Many have suggested rebuilding WTC I and II as they were. The problem is that Larry Silverstein opposed the idea and wants to limit future liability claims should the building be subject to another incident. The bigger problem is that no one wants to work in those big tall buildings. If they were re-built as they were, they would be empty. That is the reality. They've been attacked twice already. Time to do something different. Not only that, but from an urbanist perspective, those buildings were fairly terribly designed. Any new building needs to face the street, and the block the WTC cut off probably should be restored. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 13, 2008 15:25:01 GMT -5
In many ways, I think the annual 9/11 memorials are a reflection of the fact that there is no permanent memorial currently constructed that allows individuals to choose when and how to remember, like an FDR Memorial does in DC, Vietnam War Memorial (perhaps a better example), etc. It took us decades to figure out how to address the Vietnam War, and we appear to be on track for that in terms of 9/11.
Our nation's immediate reaction was surprisingly apt with the appropriate memorials in the immediate term and inspired/inspiring clean-up effort in NYC. Then, we appropriately deposed the Taliban regime. We went terribly off-course in the following years and showed the world that we were willing to attack a country under pretenses that were empirically false and misleading and, in the process, hide behind 9/11 as an argument. In terms of the pre-war "intelligence," there is no factual argument beyond "Saddam was a bad guy and killed innocent people" that was prescient or accurate on an empirical level. By tying Iraq so closely to 9/11, the effect of our government's actions has been to cheapen what 9/11 is to Americans and the world and might have started a Vietnam-like legacy of 9/11 in American culture and memory in terms of our country trying to grapple with what 9/11 meant and how to address it in foreign policy (not in terms of how the War Against Iraq was conducted). Republicans have all but abandoned traditional realist foreign policy but have come up with an idea as to how to address it, and Democrats have not quite adjusted ideologically to answer key questions about post-9/11 foreign policy.
The ownership of 9/11 in terms of a public event and historical event has been appropriated by a political party and taken out of the domain of the country itself in American discourse. Rudy Giuliani is a prime example. You don't hear anybody call him America's Mayor any more since he decided to make his post-mayorial political career off of a half-baked idea that 9/11 gave him foreign policy experience. Use of images of 9/11 in partisan videos and advertisements is particularly crude and disgraceful but liable to happen given the above.
|
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Sept 13, 2008 18:51:20 GMT -5
hifi=BUM
That said, rebuild bigger and better.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,928
|
Post by Filo on Sept 13, 2008 18:58:56 GMT -5
The ownership of 9/11 in terms of a public event and historical event has been appropriated by a political party and taken out of the domain of the country itself in American discourse. That's just partisan hyperbole. And citing Rudy to support this doesn't work since, as you imply, Rudy's antics apparently backfired (he's no longer America's Mayor, right?). |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 13, 2008 19:39:51 GMT -5
The ownership of 9/11 in terms of a public event and historical event has been appropriated by a political party and taken out of the domain of the country itself in American discourse. That's just partisan hyperbole. And citing Rudy to support this doesn't work since, as you imply, Rudy's antics apparently backfired (he's no longer America's Mayor, right?). Well, you may have heard President Bush say that Democrats have not learned "the lessons of 9/11." That seems pretty clear to me. |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Sept 13, 2008 20:08:55 GMT -5
That's just partisan hyperbole. And citing Rudy to support this doesn't work since, as you imply, Rudy's antics apparently backfired (he's no longer America's Mayor, right?). Well, you may have heard President Bush say that Democrats have not learned "the lessons of 9/11." That seems pretty clear to me. Yeah I'm gonna have to agree with Ambassador. One convention played a fairly absurd 9/11 video, which culminated in an awkward round of applause. The Dems have not to my knowledge utilized 9/11 has such a political topic. If Obama wins, I am interested to see if he invokes 9/11 as often as Bush. My expectation is that Obama would not. McCain would. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that's a very reasonable expectation that many would share. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 13, 2008 20:32:24 GMT -5
Of course, for some of us, that is the problem, that Democrats do NOT invoke 9/11.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 13, 2008 20:44:07 GMT -5
Of course, for some of us, that is the problem, that Democrats do NOT invoke 9/11. I can see why some Republicans think that, but there are ways of criticizing it other than saying that Democrats didn't experience 9/11, didn't learn anything from it, or cheerled with terrorists when it happened. The reality is that they have continued to lay out policy positions as to Afghanistan, specifically, that represent one way of going after the terrorists. I don't necessarily agree with it in all spots, but it is an idea worthy of consideration rather than dismissal out of hand. But make the debate about policy in light of 9/11 and the current dynamics of the world. Leave the 9/11 videos out of partisan events and dialogue. 9/11 is not some Republican day. It is not for the Democrats either. It is a day for Americans to remember and reflect. |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Sept 13, 2008 20:44:45 GMT -5
Of course, for some of us, that is the problem, that Democrats do NOT invoke 9/11. I can see the desire to reference it more and keep reminded of its significance. On Thursday night, I watched over 3 hours of replayed footage WAY after my bedtime. I still acknowledge the importance. I just don't like when it seems like part of a political strategy. To some degree, it also reminds me of how much national and international unity there was in the days and weeks following the attacks. It's sad that not more good came of that unique response. |
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 14, 2008 17:53:27 GMT -5
Of course, for some of us, that is the problem, that Democrats do NOT invoke 9/11. And for some of us, the problem is that the Republicans can't seem to get past 9/12. |
|
FewFAC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,032
|
Post by FewFAC on Sept 15, 2008 1:43:03 GMT -5
Of course, for some of us, that is the problem, that Democrats do NOT invoke 9/11. We understand how difficult it is for Republicans to acknowledge truth. |
|
