Saturday, September 11, 2010


Each year since I began blogging, I've posted carefully considered remembrance pieces on the anniversary of the September 11th terrorist attacks: 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004. This year, the occasion is likely to be dominated by competing protests about the mosque proposed to be built near the Trade Tower site, and the coincidence of the Islamic Eid holiday that same day. Even President Obama doesn't know what to do.

Nor do I. With no disrespect to the three friends I lost that day, or the grief of other mourners, I've little more to say on the subject. Not due to doubt or diverging positions: this nation remains the best hope for peace and justice in the world. And though the President performed a policy name-change and often sounds unconvinced, he's mostly a convert to winning the war on terror Bush began. Even if the press now passes-over its former put-downs.

For now, that's enough to honor the memory of 3,000 Americans murdered nine years ago today. Requiescat in pace.


OBloodyHell said...

The issue I have is mainly with the disconnect of:

a) It it rather exceptionally clear that the GZM is considered offensive to a large percentage of Americans.

b) Americans -- indeed EVERYONE in the world -- are all expected to tread lightly whenever there is risk of doing anthing that is, in the ever-so-slightest way -- offensive to Islamic sensitivities. Witness Theo Van Gogh, Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the whole "Cartoon" brouhaha, and the very most recent Koran burning issue.

Sorry, I'm not accepting that disconnect any more.

F*** Islam.

F*** Allah.

F*** the Qu'ran.

I know there are moderate moslems. But until THEY decide to police their own f***ed up members, they're getting lumped with those f***ed up members as people I DON'T CARE ABOUT

OBloodyHell said...

Dr. Sanity Links to this lovely little piece:

Koran Non-Burning Day

OBloodyHell said...

I also offer two quotes, one directly relevant to this, one secondarily so:

A function of free speech under our system of government is to INVITE
DISPUTE. It may indeed best serve its high purposes when it induces a
condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are,
or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and
challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have
profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea.

- Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas -


There is no week, nor day, nor hour, when tyranny may not enter upon this
country, if the people lose their supreme confidence in themselves - and lose
their roughness and spirit of defiance.

- Walt Whitman -

The pastor is simply telling the imams to go F*** Off, in the most American of ways.

Carl said...

It certainly seems asymmetrical: we're supposed to show concern for the feelings Islam, yet Islam rarely directs anything short of hate towards America. That places us in the position of capitulating to the heckler's veto, which goes against the thrust of our Constitutional free speech rights (and has before this been an important advantage of civil liberties protection in America as opposed to Europe).