S11 - a diatribe

[thorfinn]

Let's start with some URLs, in vague order of seriousness:

• The Onion - Bush Won't Stop Asking


• The Onion - 9/11 Anniversary Infograph


• Flem Comics


• USA Today - Why Does Everybody Hate Us?


• September Hearts - Afghani Blood


• Los Angeles New Times - Enough Already!


• Afghani People in the Crosshairs


• Washington Post - War Without Evidence


• Washington Post - The Long and the Short of It


• People's Daily - US-British Warplanes Bomb Civil Airport in Northern Iraq


• AZ Central - US Jets Again Attack Iraqi Air Defenses

Now, if you can't be bothered reading all of the above... Let me summarise.

So, 3000 people died in New York on this day last year. US Civilians, for the most part. Due to a well executed attack from a known and declared enemy of the US. Today, there are several thousand "accidentally" dead Afghani civilians, due directly to US military action in Afghanistan. Fucking get over it already. There are much worse tragedies in the world, that go unmarked, uncelebrated, and unremembered, and not a small number are perpetrated as a direct result of US action.

Last week, depending on your source, US and British warplanes bombed the crap out of either a "civilian airport" or an "air defense" installation. So what if it's the latter, you say? Well, it's Iraqi fucking airspace those warplanes are violating there. Last I checked, there's no declared war. "Just 'cos we feel like it" is not a valid reason to go bombing someone else's country.

Get over it. September 11, 2001 was a small minor disaster. The whole world does not have to go into mourning. Fuck off, America.

Comments

Yep

[lirion.livejournal.com]

Yeah people died, and that's a tragedy sure enough. I ahve no problem with people mourning said tragedy. But I don't see why Australia - or inf act the rest of the world - has to come to a standstill today. Do we not have a life outrside of what is happening, or in this case, has happened in America?
America should get off their fucking high horse and accept the fact that they are not invincible rather than retalliating elft right and center because their pride was injured as well as all those people. They didn't expect anyone to have the audacity to attack them and they still don't a year later. They are stiking out at anone on little pretext to prove to the world that they are The Big Bad and none shall touch them again. And what does this do if not reinforce the feelings of those who struck int eh first place?

Fuck, I really wasn't going to get into this. have strictly avoided posting about it, but, what the hell...

Thank fuck

[drwally.livejournal.com]

Ah, the voice of common sense. I'll second that sentiment, Thorfy.

Scene: Leah and I at breakfast. I scan the television guide. 'Hey, Channel 10 and SBS have ordinary broadcasting.'

'Oh thank god.'

All this saccarine sentimentality and commercialized mourning makes me want to fly a plane into a building.

oh, that's right ...

[anothertwilight.livejournal.com]

OK, I don't watch TV, read newspapers or listen to radio, so the fact that a couple of LJ posts were talking terrorism and commenting on S11 had not yet become associated with today's date, in my mind. I even read this post, nodded thoughtfully, moved on, and read another, far more explicitely saying 'today is the one year anniversary ...'.

That said, it still doesn't impact that much. Perhaps it is like watching people forcing emotion that they think is appropriate at funerals, celebrations etc. This just does not seem real, more like an exercise where the result is not catharsis or expression, but rather a careful decision to 'maintain the rage' or similar. I find it incredible that a country that has been aware that it's army has waged war upon civilian targets for the past 30 years can truly feel outraged at the same being done in turn. This is war, they are at war, why the confusion?

I also cannot help feeling a little like someone has taken the genuine loss and grief of the families of those hurt and injured, and thinned it out so that it can be spread over everone else as a kind of anointing before 'that which must be done'. Mind you don't get it in your eyes.

Re: oh, that's right ...

[thorfinn]

This just does not seem real, more like an exercise where the result is not catharsis or expression, but rather a careful decision to 'maintain the rage' or similar.

Uhh... Occam's Razor suggests that it is, indeed, a very carefully waged and highly successful propaganda campaign by G.W. Bush and Co. A vast preponderance of evidence points in that direction, and it's very very hard to ignore.

Re: Thank fuck

[madigrrl.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking of watching Neighbours tonight. Just my way of saying "thank you" to Channel
10.

[usekh.livejournal.com]

I have some very dear american friends, and some of american descent.

And I cannot support any regime or group that targets civilians and inflicts terrorism and opression on other peoples.

Unfortunetly that too often includes the US. I hope you don't mind me posting a link to this entry Thorfinn? brief but says pretty much all i was going to :)

[thorfinn]

It's not a locked entry. I thus expect it to be available to and possibly seen by the entire world. Go right ahead and link to it.

As for the US being terrorists... exactly. That's why I have no sympathy, and no caring for the "innocent civilians". If you're a US citizen, you're responsible for the actions of your government, and the counter-reactions received. That's what being a Citizen means at its very core. Perhaps it would be "fairer" if US enemies struck more "evenly"... but wars have never been about "fairness".

I have more sympathy for the foreign tourists caught up in the event. That's unfortunate. But that's what happens when you visit countries that people have declared war on. Harsh? Yep.

[anthologie.livejournal.com]

I don't think the fact that other innocents in other countries die on a daily basis is a reason to 'get over' the loss of 3,000 innocents in the US.

I think it's a reason to be a lot more senstive to the deaths of innocents everywhere.

It makes me miserable, what the American government is doing in foreign lands. Tell me what you would have the American populous (assuming we could get them to agree to something as "radical" as no more senseless death) do to change things? I'm not saying we are helpless in the hands of our government, but considering a guy I never voted for (and most people didn't) managed to swindle his way into office, there are times when I feel pretty helpless.

Fake Tears...

[thorfinn]

Hold a violent and bloody revolution, stick G.W. Bush's head on a pike outside the White House, then hold a constitutional convention and come up with something sane. And I'm not actually kidding about that. The US is ripe for a complete revamp of it's political system (it isn't a democracy, or even a sane representative democracy, to begin with) - and historically, there isn't any way to do that other than bloody revolution.

As for sensitivity... Yeah, I'm sensitive to the deaths of innocents everywhere. What can I actually do about it? Nothing. What I do do is act to prevent bad things from occurring around myself, as best I can, all the time. The events of September 11, 2001 did absolutely nothing to change or promote that.

As I just said over in aus.culture.gothic... If you knew some of the dead, by all means, mourn. The dead should be mourned by those who knew them. If you didn't, then don't cry fake tears. Do something real instead.

[nigelw.livejournal.com]

But that's what happens when you visit countries that people have declared war on. Harsh? Yep.

And nobody gets particularly outraged when (for example) an Australian tourist walks down the Gaza strip and gets accidentally shot. Or goes to Sarajevo and gets shot. Or Chechenya. Et cetera. We shrug and say "stupid bugger". Maybe feel a little sad that someone's lost a friend, child, lover. But we don't go and bomb the killer's country.

Re: Fake Tears...

[mikz.livejournal.com]

I like this comment even better than your original post.

I was there when the Shurb became president. Cool, I thought, America would finally wake up to the fact that their democracy is fucked and riot in the streets in the name of the freedom they reckon they have. So I went into the streets and waited... nothing happened. I was absolutely appalled.

But I'm also appalled that Australians aren't rioting in the streets because of the way our arrogant dweeb of a prime minister is roping us into this bullshit. I lost a lot of faith in Australians after they voted that cunt's party back in—unfortunately, we can't use the "we're not really a democracy" excuse because our elections are preferential and at least somewhat proportional. While I don't think any terrorist group would be stupid to try anything today, I'm feeling a lot safer here in Europe than I would be if I was still in the US, and thanks to Little Johnny I'll Show What A Great Leader I Am By Sucking George Bush's Cock Howard, I think I'm safer here than at home as well.

Re: Fake Tears...

[mikz.livejournal.com]

BTW, one of my poly family member lost her lover that day, two of my lovers lost relatives, and a few friends' friends died too. Therefore it definitely did hit home, but I've realised that I really have nothing to mourn. I'm still too horrified about the vengeance that a lot of people are still seeking. Even this site (http://www.unitedforpeace.org) apparently got hacked.

Hugely missing the point

[erudito.livejournal.com]

So many people comment about international issues as if the key question is what we think of the US and Americans. We have to get our mind around that there are other central issues, one's often much more important.

The US is stuck. If there are no consequences to Sept 11, then there will be more of them. If it acts against those who killed American (and other) civilians, then innocents are going to get hurt. A lot more Japanese died in the Pacific War than Americans were killed at Pearl Harbour. That doesn't means the Americans were required to do nothing about Pearl Harbour. And at least Pearl Harbour was a military target. (I would also take claims of *thousands* of Afghan civilian casualties from US assistance to the Northern Alliance with a large grain of salt.)

It is a network like Al-Qaeda which is *most* likely to use weapons of mass destruction, since, unlike states, they have no territorial entity which is hostage to reprisals. And these guys hate us. They hate all of us, not just Americans. They hate all the secular Western societies. They hate us for being secular, for being successful, for practising various 'abominations' (e.g. increasing normalisation of gays, feminism etc). America is the first target because it is the bigger target, but that is all.

As Christopher Hitchens has pointed out, the casualties of Sept 11 were casualties in an Islamic civil war. (see http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/04/1031115884039.html) And we really don't want the Islamists to win that civil war.

The attacks of Sept 11 were not merely an attack on the US, they were an attack on ordinary life in the West by people who hate that life. And we shouldn't imply in any way that killing Americans means we ignore what people behind such acts stand for.

Re: oh, that's right ...

[bunnikins.livejournal.com]

>I also cannot help feeling a little like someone has taken the genuine loss >and grief of the families of those hurt and injured, and thinned it out so >that it can be spread over everone else as a kind of anointing before 'that >which must be done'. Mind you don't get it in your eyes.

And spent the previous year on a search for the most photogenic bereaved people & families they could find...I don't watch that stuff by choice either, but catching the adbreaks was enough to give me the impression that only beautiful and appealing people lost family and friends, and all those killed were saints. Perhaps they're saving the interviews with plain & less sympathetic victims for a non-ratings period?

Re: oh, that's right ...

[anothertwilight.livejournal.com]

Didn't you get the memo? Plain people deserve to die. Beauty is proof that God (tm) loves you.

[mmmetta.livejournal.com]

there's a ratio.

20000 other "first world" citizens to every 1 yank.
1 million of anyone else to every 1 yank.

there's also some kind of time length ratio on the time it's in the news too. half a million chinese get drowned in a flood, and it's news for maybe a day. 10 cops get shot and it's news for a week or so. 1 yank, and it's news for six months or so... i'm expecting the world trade centre to be news value until the turn of the century. at least.

Re: Fake Tears...

[mmmetta.livejournal.com]

weelll... we didn't actually vote his party back in. the liberals have a coalition with the national party. without the national party seats, the liberals would rarely get in. just, old farmers won't vote labour... labour still get well over 50% of the votes, and about 48% of the seats (on their own merit).

so, we voted for liberal in the same way that the US voted for george :->

[mmmetta.livejournal.com]

i'm noticing a disturbing trend, actually.

even in articles that openly point out that america is disliked for x, y or z, and has done r, s and t... are saying things like the world is "afraid of the power America has", or that the things the yanks do are just what others "think they have done"... it seems like a carefully calculated attempt to come to grips with overwhelming dislike from the rest of the world -- and then make it all ok in the yank mind by describing it as "jealousy", or "delusion".

rather than actually admitting that there is merit in the multitude of reasons for disliking the american government.

Re: Fake Tears...

[mikz.livejournal.com]

That's true; the Libs by themselves didn't get in. However, everybody knew that the Libs and the Nats (remember when they called themselves the Country Party? The one-syllable form of that party would have been so apt!) were in coalition, so that a vote for either party would have amounted to pretty much the same thing, especially if they voted above the line.

Also, the U.S. election ended up being decided by biased Supreme Court judges, and even if it didn't, the election was rigged, and even if it wasn't, the U.S. electoral system still isn't very democratic, and even if it was, not enough people in the U.S. vote for it to matter anyhow.

BTW, the name of the more left-wing of the two or three major parties in Australian federal politics is "Labor"—even if their policies were better I still wouldn't give them very high preferences because their name is an Americanism.

Re: Fake Tears...

[mmmetta.livejournal.com]

i'm incapable of actually typing the non-u words. maybe labo(u)r got rid of the u so as to not be confused with the 'workers party' the way they actually *used* to be... you know, when we had a right _and_ a left wing party in politics... instead of right and other-right (or is that right, and wrong?). did they always call themselves that? it's not like anyone spelt anything like a yank back when they were first formed, surely.

yeah, i remember the c(o)untry party. i dunno, i really can't stand the way people fuck with the two-party system we've ended up with. people (as you say) should realise that a vote for the national party is a vote for the libs ... they should also realise that a vote for the greens, or an independant, or the natural law (snort) party or whoever else they want, is also essentially a vote for the liberal party...

sure, vote for those guys in the senate, or in your local council, but not for the house of reps. i hate how all those votes and seats chip away at the chance of labour being in charge again. ballot papers should just have two squares.

[ ] Liberal
[ ] not Liberal.

that ought to make things easier for people to understand :-).

i still have dickhead friends who don't understand about the two-party system we have in reality vs the supposed multi-party system that exists on paper.

also, i think the coalition should be *equal*. half the portfolios going to each of the parties, and a joint prime-minister. it's not like little johnny would have made it without the nationals this time -- no matter how many times he babbled "clear mandate". he can stick that GST up his arse too.

dunno, i really can't stand living in a Liberal run country, they've fucked so much up in the last 6 years. it's funny. nearly every state is labour at the moment, but federally we have little johnny...

Re: Fake Tears...

[anthologie.livejournal.com]

A revolution won't work in this country as long as most of its civilians remain asleep, believing that GWB actually represents their interests at home and in the world.

Cutting off the head of the hydra does nothing -- another head sprouts in its place.

American politics is too entrenched, and the populous too complacent, for a revolution to work at this point.

Also, I don't think you have to have known something to be sad they were killed.

Re: Fake Tears...

[anthologie.livejournal.com]

"Also, I don't think you have to have known something to be sad they were killed."

Err. Someone, not something.

Re: Fake Tears...

[thorfinn]

True. But, like I said... if I was sad for the deaths of every person I didn't know, I'd be sad all the damn time. I'm not going to burn a candle all day every day for all the people that die due for stupid and terrible reasons. I'd run out of money for candles in short order.

As for the US political system being screwed... well, yes. If you feel powerless, do something about it. Convince people to vote the other way, speak out, yell, scream, shout, run for office, foment revolution and change. But don't disclaim responsibility for your government. It is your country, right or wrong, unless you renounce citizenship.

Re: Hugely missing the point

[thorfinn]

Uhh... what, exactly, does Iraq have to do with Al-Qaeda? Despite desperate attempts to link the two by the US, no evidence has yet been raised. Not even mildly credible circumstantial evidence.

By all means, fight the damn terrorists. But be bloody fucking sure that the people you're attacking are actually terrorists, not a goddamn wedding party.

And despite loud declamations from the US, I really find it hard to believe that Iraq is capable of fielding WoMD anywhere except very locally. There is no evidence to suggest that they have the capability, or even the likelihood of developing the capability.

By all means, send in the UN inspectors, backing that with force if necessary to persuade Saddam to let them in... but don't just go bombing airports at random! That's not an acceptable act. That's the act of a terrorist State. Excuse me if I have no sympathy for terror being returned on terrorist states.

Re: Hugely missing the point

[pratap.livejournal.com]

Exactly right. It was good coming across your posts & replies; thank goodness some people aren't just accepting of the guff that the media shovels down their throats.

I had a vaguely similar rant in my lj here (http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=pratap&itemid=58177#cutid1)
(c:

Mind if I add you on?