Before 9/11

Have been to the Memorial on a couple of occasions, and just recently the 911 Museum. The last display room presented tourist pix and artifacts of life prior to that day. The only time we smiled during the visit.

Little things like Billy Squier's video (and Freddie's voice) help as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7GoeUH8Vls

I'm in the neighborhood but I've never been to the memorial. Not sure why. All I really know about it is how some people felt the museum shop, with 9/11 memorabilia for sale, was in poor taste. But I guess since capitalism was under attack that day, too, then a for-profit gift shop makes sense.

Still, I'm sad today partly because the pain of loss still lingers here but also because nothing has changed. "Never Forget" seems to be the slogan not for remembering the lives of those who were murdered or the heroics of the first responders, but for wallowing and aggrandizing. It was agony to have an attack like that happen here, in the US, specifically in NYC. But attacks are happening in other parts of the world, too and were happening before 9/11. On a regular basis, people are being tortured, killed or made to suffer under oppressive, extremist ideals. "Never Forget" should mean never let it happen again. Anywhere. Not just at home.


I love that song, btw. I'm a Billy Squier fan but it's Freddie who makes that song so good. And I do love my city's old skyline, too..

"But I guess since capitalism was under attack that day, too, then a for-profit gift shop makes sense."

That has to be one of the most nonsensical, non-factual remarks I've ever seen on this forum, and that's saying something! In what way does 9/11 have any bearing on capitalism in any way? Capitalism, particularly neo-conservatism, has come under attack since the crisis of 2008, i.e. 7 years later. And still, most people by far are totally uncritical about that system, despite its ever-larger failings. Sounds to me like you were simply exercising a little wishful thinking when you wrote that.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
That has to be one of the most nonsensical, non-factual remarks I've ever seen on this forum, and that's saying something! [/QUOTE]

We really need to work on your timidity, TQ. Seriously, learn not to beat around the bush. Just, say what’s on your mind.

[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
In what way does 9/11 have any bearing on capitalism in any way? Capitalism, particularly neo-conservatism, has come under attack since the crisis of 2008, i.e. 7 years later. And still, most people by far are totally uncritical about that system, despite its ever-larger failings. Sounds to me like you were simply exercising a little wishful thinking when you wrote that. [/QUOTE]

If I was exercising anything, it was a little snark since I'm sadly amused by the irony of mourning and profiting from the same event.

Beyond that...label me as one of the sheep if you'd like, but I stand by my comment. I absolutely believe that rattling the capitalist system by targeting the World Trade Center - capitalism's very symbol - was very much a goal of the 9/11 attacks.

Clearly, you do not agree.

What do you guys think about all the conspiracy theories? I knew some of them and some of them actually sound really interesting, but yesterday I heard for the very first time the claim that actually no planes hit the buildings. I've seen it in a youtube documentary (September clues) and to be honest I don't know what to think - on one side their arguments seem pretty strong, but on the other side it all seems just TOO crazy to believe.

If you ask me, the plains destroyed the towers. But i think, and that is a personal opinion, some people in the goverment knew about the attacks and they did nothing to stop it.

That's the perfect excuse to start a lucrative war, it wouldn't be the first time USA let something like that happen to start a conflict.

america did NOT let it happen deliberately. think about it. the negligence claims following a leak of that information would be enough to cripple the american economy permanently. 3,000+ people in the vicintity, relatives, damage to business continuity, reputation, insurance etc etc....no chance. THEY may have been stupid enough to think "it'll never happen here" or maybe the intel wasn't as good as they thought they were...but nO WAY could they deliberately let this happen.

there's no doubt these things happened as described. there'd be far too many people to have to hush. it's not possible. the conspiracy theorists are lonely bedroom dwelling w*nkers who haven't got a life or any kind of perspective on reality. think about it. what kind of mind can create such theories without deferring to the obvious undeniable facts. people died, planes hit buildings at a few hundred MPH...buildings collapsed.
no matter what these idiots believe was concocted by Govts etc, even if you could fake ALL of the TV footage (haha) you can't fake ALL those amateur films and independant accounts. people actually SAW planes hit buildings - people's eyes (in the street) did NOT see CGI - they saw events in real-time.

these people deny everything, because creating a fantasy world to believe in makes their own sad existences somewhat more interesting...and garners their desire for attention.

For me the only over-riding factor is the insult and disservice these cretins do to the memory of those who died, and the lack of respect it shows to the bereaved. these are the same people who slow down and rubber-neck road accidents - ghouls all of them

You're right, a goverment could never forfeit the lives of a few citizens in order to fulfill their objetives, that's never happened in the past, and of course not in the USA.

[QUOTE] [b]Doga wrote:[/b]

You're right, a goverment could never forfeit the lives of a few citizens in order to fulfill their objetives, that's never happened in the past, and of course not in the USA.[/QUOTE]

you definitely like your conspiracies eh? but like most conspiracy-subscribers you overlook the facts.

1. if the govt knew about the attacks well in advance, then why no attempts to contact the planes and when that fails - then shoot the planes down?
2. as i said too many people to "hush" - think about how Govt works...someone somewhere "in the know" would've (by this time) have had a grievance against someone else "in the know" - and that's when secrets get into the open....no way would anyone in the know have kept this under wraps this long
3. as a said - too much compensation to pay for negligence/culpable homicide.

nah. sorry i honestly believe it's just a case of the govt intel at the time just not being good enough to realise that an attack was imminent, or more particularly - where an attack would take place

You can believe what you want of course, but i honestly think the Twin Towers played the same role of the USS Maine in Cuba.

[QUOTE] [b]Doga wrote:[/b] You can believe what you want of course, but i honestly think the Twin Towers played the same role of the USS Maine in Cuba.[/QUOTE]

you do realise that there is a huge difference between 19th century media, and the media today. IF there were a single piece of evidence to prove your conspiracy for the twin towers it'd have leaked long ago. the fact that ALL we have are conspiracy theories with NO actual facts bears this out. Conspiracy Theories without evidence and proof are just the meanderings and rantings of insane sociopathic nutjobs, with no girlfriend/wife or family life to speak of. sometimes these looney-loners end up killing classrooms full of students.

NB: re: USS Maine - still no proof (over a century later) of what definitely cause the explosion. But, even if this were internal tactical sabotage (as you imply) then you ignore a key fact:
those on board the USS Maine were military and military history is full of casualties of war who died in what baseball terms would call a "sacrifice fly". the people in the twin towers were civilian.

your choice of comparison is shoddy - if you're going to make reference to other events - make them comparable. "US people dying" is not enough without the events and circumstance being similar and a presence of established proof.

And so it goes on.......

[QUOTE] [b]brENsKi wrote:[/b]

nah. sorry i honestly believe it's just a case of the govt intel at the time just not being good enough to realise that an attack was imminent, or more particularly - where an attack would take place [/QUOTE]

I love my country, I truly do, and I agree with much of what you said, but I don't think it was about poor intel as much as it was about the incompetence and arrogance of those reviewing it.

The evidence was there for the Bush administration prior to the attack. In memos released to the public after the fact, all signs pointed directly to the use of planes over the US, including notes about hijackings, flying into buildings, and titles like, 'bin Laden to strike within the US'. Added to that was the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers. That attack failed to take the towers down, but a vow was made that further attempts would be carried out. That alone should have placed the World Trade Center in a permanent spot at the top of the target list.

Instead, the administration either ignored all the warnings (incompetence), failed to connect the dots (also incompetence since connecting the dots was their job), truly believed an attack would never/could never occur on US soil (arrogance) or simply did not want to heed warnings or accept advice from the previous administration (also arrogance).

I don't think they 'let' it happen, but I do believe they could have prevented it.

Twoofers are the biggest morons on the internet.