Wrong Time, Wrong Place For Lefties' Pc Prattle

[Gawain of Orkeny]

WRONG TIME, WRONG PLACE FOR LEFTIES' PC PRATTLE

By ANDREA PEYSER Tue Jun 21, 5:59 AM ET

NEARLY four years after her husband was murdered on 9/11 just because he was American, Loisanne Diehl stood in lower Manhattan, defending her beloved from those who would insist he deserved to die.


"He did not have it coming to him," said Lois. "None of them."

After all this time, her tears came easily. And, to my surprise, so did mine. Because less than four years after America was sucker-punched by terrorists, we are again under a vicious attack.

Only this time, those who would destroy our way of life are working from within.

Here, at the spot known as Ground Zero — where Michael Diehl was killed, along with nearly 2,800 human beings — planners are busy developing an "International Freedom Center." Finally! A place you can visit to find out exactly what you did wrong to bring about the 9/11 attacks.

Hundreds of relatives of those slaughtered at the World Trade Center, for a long while divided by politics and separated by time, came out yesterday in a unified show of force, to perform a previously unimaginable task. They came here to defend their loved ones against a blood libel.

They needed to make sure that no one forgets what really happened here.

"There is no justification for what happened — this was a mass murder," said Richard Pecorella of Bensonhurst, Brooklyn, who came to Ground Zero clutching a photograph of his dead fiance, Karen Juday.

He and his "farm girl from Indiana" lived together five years, and were to be married in a few months.

"I never got to see her again," he said, through tear-stained eyes.

It struck me how awful it was that Pecorella found it necessary to make this argument. To suggest that someone might blame Karen, an administrative assistant for Cantor Fitzgerald, for her own death was beyond obscene. But there it is.

Planners entrusted with developing the Ground Zero memorial have determined that this city needs some sort of "cultural" — their word — component to the site.

The idea is to build an educational center — more like an indoctrination center, it seems to me — with exhibits examining unrelated outrages of the past, many of them committed by Americans. Slavery and the treatment of American Indians, just to name two.

There is a place for this, to be sure. But why at Ground Zero?

It seems the advisory committee for the Freedom Center is peppered with folks who brandish leftist political agendas. These include a Columbia professor who said, three weeks after 9/11, that he didn't know what was scarier — the terror attacks or the White House's response to them. Also, types who condemn America for supposedly cracking down on civil liberties after 9/11.

The Freedom Center would feature a forum for "debate" — center president Richard Tofel's word — about such issues.

Rose Canavan, 64, of Long Island, who lost her son, Sean, doesn't want to hear of it. With none of his remains recovered at the Trade Center, she just wants a peaceful place to visit him. Nothing more.

"They were all there just to go to work," said Rose, "not to mess around.

"It shouldn't be too much to ask."

No, it should not.

If you want to engage in political debate, there are many venues in which to do so. Not here. Not now.

We don't need the Freedom Center.

LINK

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Dozens of relatives who lost loved ones in the September 11, 2001, attacks are protesting plans for cultural institutions on the World Trade Center site, particularly the International Freedom Center that some families fear will detract from a 9/11 memorial.

LINK

Whats wrong with these people?

[Don Corleone]

I am 100% behind acknowledging my own, and America's wrongs. I have done some terrible things in my life, as has my country. But just as my sister's funeral is not the place to show up and make your grievances against me, ground zero is not the place to make this argument against America. I have no idea what passes for intelligence these days, but it sickens me.

[Xiahou]

There is a place for this, to be sure. But why at Ground Zero?

Why indeed?

[Papewaio]

The idea is to build an educational center — more like an indoctrination center, it seems to me — with exhibits examining unrelated outrages of the past, many of them committed by Americans. Slavery and the treatment of American Indians, just to name two.

I don't think it is ever wise to highlight the injustices done to a nation without the counterbalance of wrongs done by that nation.

I disagree with the way Hiroshima and Nagasaki are portrayed as separate events to that of WWII. The way people remember it is as if the Allies just flew across a peaceful Japan one day and decided to drop nuclear weapons for no reason.

However I don't think slavery and the treatment of American Indians has anything to do with the attack on the WTC and Pentagon. Nor do I think terrorism should be given a serious venue as a valid counter point to that of the WTC. Even if the fundamentalists have a twisted reason it does not make it a valid rational one.

I think the place should be a memorial to those people at Ground Zero, and it should also be seen as more then an attack on America, it should be seen as an attack on Western Civilisation. It would be nice to remember what those values are as well.

[Don Corleone]

Well, it wasn't just Americans that died. It was the World Trade Center. World, what do you think? Do you want the final resting place of your people to be a propaganda station? I've heard one no, from down under.

[GoreBag]

Now...it seems odd to me that opposition to this is coupled with a bunch of leftist slurs. If you really want to make people believe that your reverence for the dead of the attacks that took place is really that important, should you really use it as a means to push your political agenda?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

When is the time and place for pc prattle?

[Don Corleone]

Kojiro-san,
There are plenty of times and places to make the argument against the wrongs done by the US. As I said in my metaphorical post, do you want to be the one to rub the noses of the victims families in each and every last misdeed ever done by the US, regardless of their own national origin or whether said victim agreed with said policy or not?

Edit: More importantly, even if you think each and every friend/family member of a person who died in 9/11 needs to be reminded of America's ills, do you really honestly believe that is the place to do it? If so, I nominate you for the job. Quit whatever activity you're currently employed in, we will set up a fund for you to tell the visitors of the site why their loved ones needed to be made examples of.

[Productivity]

I agree it is the wrong place, and wrong time for it, but this leads to a counter question.

When and where are the right times and places for a country to accept it's own faults?

I'm being serious here, I'm not sure when I think is the right time. I can find plenty of times that I think are the wrong time, but when is the right time?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Kojiro-san,
There are plenty of times and places to make the argument against the wrongs done by the US. As I said in my metaphorical post, do you want to be the one to rub the noses of the victims families in each and every last misdeed ever done by the US, regardless of their own national origin or whether said victim agreed with said policy or not?

Edit: More importantly, even if you think each and every friend/family member of a person who died in 9/11 needs to be reminded of America's ills, do you really honestly believe that is the place to do it? If so, I nominate you for the job. Quit whatever activity you're currently employed in, we will set up a fund for you to tell the visitors of the site why their loved ones needed to be made examples of.

I agree with you, I was just commenting on the title.

[Don Corleone]

My apologies. It's a bit of a sensitive subject for me. My apologies, Kojiro-san.

[Don Corleone]

Well, DGB, we have a Wounded Knee memorial, where we acknowledge that we pretty shamelessly slaughtered a bunch of Sioux women and children. We have a park dedicated to reminding people of the interment of Japanese American citizens in Utah. We have a memorial for the Cherokee's Trail of Tears. We're not shy. When we $^! up, we admit it, and attempt to acknowledge it. But is Ground Zero really the place you want to do that? (Rhetorical question)

[JAG]

I am 100% behind acknowledging my own, and America's wrongs. I have done some terrible things in my life, as has my country. But just as my sister's funeral is not the place to show up and make your grievances against me, ground zero is not the place to make this argument against America. I have no idea what passes for intelligence these days, but it sickens me.

If I am honest, when I read that post I did nod my head and think 'bang on'.

My position on 9/11 is that it was clearly uneccesary, out of order and a terrible act. But that the fact that it was all these things and should most definately not have been done, it does not mean the US and the west as a whole should ignore their own wrongs which although might not have caused directly the 9/11 attacks, helped create the hate and feeling of anger in the muslim world.

The debate - which to this point Don I think you need to accept - thus far has been drowned out by the 'your anti American for saying that!', crowd whenever the opinion I outlined is stated. This needs to be sorted out and a new arena for the debate in the public needs to be found, but I really don't think ground zero is the best place.

[Don Corleone]

Jag,

I think you'll find that when you point out to Americans "You may not know this, but America frequently does some shitty things. Here's a couple..." you'll get a much different reaction then "Well, you had it coming, cause at one point, somebody on your payroll did this..."

I could probably give you ammo to fight me with in terms of what I know that we've done wrong over the years. Yes, of course we've made some terrible mistakes. I do not subscribe to 9/11 as giving us a clean slate on all that, and I rarely link that to other criticism.

Now, if you want to talk about whether or not I can make a defense fo a poor position we've taken, well, that's a different matter. Yes, we've done the wrong thing, for the right reason at times. I think the problem you're having, my friend, is that you assume we see the righteousness of your argument when we don't. You then assume we're digging in our heels and then we do as well.

I think you'd be a fool to live in any modern country and claim your country has never done things against the morals of the people it represents. But I think you'd also be a fool to assume the people who made those choices weren't aware they were betraying their consciences and probably had a good reason for it.

Which, if I may, brings us full circle. From audio & video tapes release by AQ themselves, 9/11, in their mind, was not a righting of past wrongs, but a blow for a worldwide muslim fundamentalist state. They viewed it as a Pearl Harbor. And they were probably surprised to find much the same reaction.

And much as I do not think it is appropriate to mention Nagasaki, interrment camps, or for that matter, the Batan Death March, at the USS Arizona memorial, I think it's a cheap shot to post a 'wrong list' at Ground Zero. If you think I'm wrong, prove it with something better than "you can't accept when you're wrong" because I certainly can.

[JAG]

I think someone misread the thrust of my post...

I might have overcomplicated it, so here we go.

If I am honest, when I read that post I did nod my head and think 'bang on'.

I.e. I thought / think you are completely correct with what you wrote in your first post.

[Don Corleone]

No, actually I did catch that, and I suppose I should have been clear in acknowledging that at the beginning of my post. And what's more, i do thank and appreciate your sentiments.

However, as I saw it, you followed it up with, "okay, I agree, sore spot for the yanks. and a bloody sore spot it was. But why all the 'we're always right now' bollocks"

My point was, it really is a sore spot for us. If you want to address America's evils, and get a non-emotional, thought-filled response, give it at least a post or two between a mention of 9/11 and whatever you choose to take issue with.

Clarified example:

Thread 1: Yeah, mate, I agree, putting up a "The bombers were the only real victims" sign was in poor taste.

Thread 2: (Note the different thread) You know, maybe you guys ought to think about not supporting Musharev (sp?). He's going to be a headache in the long run.

GOOD

Thread 1 & 2: Yeah, maybe it wasn't the greatest thing to say, but come on, it's not like you guys didn't have that, or 9/11 for that matter, coming. I mean, you support guys like Musharev (sp?) You must not mind what we think of you.

BAD

[JAG]

Well there are many touchy subjects for many people / nationalities. I think we should probably learn to be less touchy on them - I include myself in that BTW.

I understand what you are saying about the timing of bringing it up though, I just don't think when talking about the whole 9/11 situation or US foreign policy - when 9/11 is inevitably brought up by an American patron - it is realistic to think that those of us who think a different approach is necessary, will not bring up actions taken / being taken by the US.

Anyway I don't think anyone on this forum wasn't horrified by 9/11 and did not feel some form of sorrow for those who perished.

[Don Corleone]

Well, you make a good point. "9/11" is not an 'ace in the hole' we should be able to play. At least, not if the argument I just made holds any merit. Using it as a shield is no better, no worse than using it as a sword.

[Don Corleone]

But before we sing Kumbaya here, I want to make another point....

British citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Chinese citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Nigerian citizens died in the WTC bombings.
French citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Israeli citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Japanese citizens died in the WTC bombings.
German citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Saudi citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Australian citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Venezuelan citizens died in the WTC bombings.
Dutch citizens died in the WTC bombings.

Why are we the only ones who get upset by people trying to co-opt it?

[Papewaio]

Why are we the only ones who get upset by people trying to co-opt it?

That is the pointing out the splinter but missing the plank statement that so riles other countries.

We do get upset, but for some reason people rarely realise the pain that others go through unless directly confronted with it.

And sorry to bring it up here Americans can be one of the least sensitive about other countries. The American cirlce of influence far outstrips its circle of concern so to speak.

[Productivity]

Because I'm trying to study for a calculus exam .

No in all seriousness, I am upset by this, not so much because Australians died there, just because of the sheer idiocy and insensitivity of those who want it. Tehre are times and places, and the WTC site is not it. Show some respect you fools.

And I'll look into having my point made after I've dealt with the calculus exam.

[JAG]

Probably because it was on your soil, you lost the most citizens, it was meant as a direct attack on the 'great satan' US and you have identified / been identified, with it in such a way that we do now purely think of it as a US tragedy. I don't think that is particularily brilliant, as although it was meant as a direct attack on the US it was meant as an attack on the west as a whole as well.

However it is not all forgotten, there are a whole heap of countries which went into Afghanistan and even Iraq - or if they did not have a sympathising feeling towards the attacks.

That includes, Britain, France, Japan, Israel, Germany, Australia, Holland.....

[Don Corleone]

That is the pointing out the splinter but missing the plank statement that so riles other countries.

We do get upset, but for some reason people rarely realise the pain that others go through unless directly confronted with it.

And sorry to bring it up here Americans can be one of the least sensitive about other countries. The American cirlce of influence far outstrips its circle of concern so to speak.

Sorry friend, I completely fail to follow your logic here. You, as an Aussie, think it's a good idea to tack a list of America's woes up to a gravesite for your countrymen?

Yes, we are provinical. Yes, we fail to take note of the pain and suffering other people bear. But not all of us do. Some of us may not remember the Indonesia nightclub bombings, but I do. My point wasn't "why can't you suffer with us" my point was "these were your people too, do you really want our sins nailed to their coffins".

[Papewaio]

No I did not say that it is a good idea to list of America's woes.

You said:

Why are we the only ones who get upset by people trying to co-opt it?

I said other people from other countries are not happy with the co-opt. However it is an all to common happening that people do not notice the stance of other countries unless it directly impacts them.

America is huge, it has a huge impact. The stance of tiny countries is not noticed unless it directly impacts on America. The stance of America because of its might tends to directly impact on the tiny countries.

[Papewaio]

Likewise the same applies for Australia and smaller countries like Boganville and Solomons.

[Don Corleone]

You have as loud a voice here as I. I pricked you a little, and you screamed, as loudly as I. I wasn't speaking about the world at large, or media in local countries. I was speaking to the discussion going on here in our own little local 'un'.

Until I made that post, I heard not one word from a citizen of a country that had lost somebody in the WTC. So, as pissed at me as you are, I served the purpose I set out to.

If you want me to hear you, speak up.

[Papewaio]

You asked about the rest of the world not being upset. My reply is that we are it is not our fault you havn't noticed. It is a typical stance of a larger nation not to notice the feelings of smaller ones unless the smaller nation is in direct opposition or shouting loudly in unison.

[Don Corleone]

I actually (meant to) asked about members of the Org from other countries that lost members. If I was unclear, I apologize.

But you make an excellent point. This posting of 'Americas Wrongs' at the Ground Zero memorial is a big issue in Australia and I overlooked that, I'm sorry. So, what is the general attitude over there? What are you guys planning to do to interfere with the plan to post a list of grievances against America at the memorial?

[Papewaio]

I'm sure a bit of leverage could be applied by Westfields if enough Aussies got annoyed with the stance.

[Don Corleone]

Wait a second. You just bit my head off for assuming it wasn't a big issue over there, but in your most recent post, you switched back to the conditional "If enough Aussies got annoyed". Which is it? Are you as pissed as we are, and I overlooked it, or are you thinking about what will happen when you guys do get upset?