2016 Annual Sept. 11 Thread

[cr47t]

Soon it will be the 15th aniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks. Discuss, and remember.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carolyn-lukensmeyer/together-we-remember-sept_b_11939208.html

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/terence-clarke/september-11-2001_2_b_11941028.html

[Snatch Steal]

Shitpost, but

 

I had come to this corner ... to watch black men play an amazingly accomplished brand of basketball on a fenced public cement court a block from the subway entrance.

What the funk?

Why do we care that the men are Black? Why don't you capitalize Black as a race, which is a proper noun? Why don't you watch any of the White men?

Like, literally no one needed to know the men were Black. They could have been White or Asian and still been no less skilled at basketball. What the funk, Terrence?

And aside from the whole "Black is weird, I must mention it" mindset, why do we care that it's fenced in? So many excessive details in this article.

 

And the other document seems to be a cheesy anarchist ploy. I believe in America we like to call these kinds of thinkers Communists.

Pretty sure America has usually been SJWs versus Orthodox Rightists. I can't imagine a world that's any different.

[Catterjune]

Shitpost, but

 

What the funk?

Why do we care that the men are Black?

Helps you picture it in your mind. Stop getting so offended by descriptions. If he said "tall" men you wouldn't be jabroniing, but as soon as he says Black you get all offended? Get outta here with your PC Liberal crap.

[ihop]

sheet like that is neither "liberal" nor really "PC", it's just a bizarre overreaction to an adjective.

[Snatch Steal]

Helps you picture it in your mind. Stop getting so offended by descriptions. If he said "tall" men you wouldn't be jabroniing, but as soon as he says Black you get all offended? Get outta here with your PC Liberal crap.

I knew it was a matter of time before someone said something like this.

 

You see, there was never any discrimination against tall people, to a degree where they were enslaved or not welcome to sit with non-tall people or drink the same fountains. There is no history behind being tall, nor is there a tall subculture.

 

Meanwhile, Black people are still being shot by police officers for assisting autistic children and carrying toy guns.

 

If he wanted me to picture it in my mind, he could have said "thirty-five degrees to my right, a 100 by 235.5 meter restaurant entitled "Bob's Subs and Sandwiches" had neon lights and was offering $2.99 for two sandwiches with the purchase of any one adult meal (some restrictions may apply) while I--a white man--walked forward northeast during the 43 degree Fahrenheit weather, alternating the movements of my arms in the partly cloudy with a 30% chance of rain day."

 

There was literally no reason for him to just casually imply that they were Black. Why didn't he say anyone else was white? What if I imagined him as a Mexican? Then the picture wouldn't be painted in my head, so oh no! Better make sure I'm looking at the Black guys!

 

And of course, you fling around the term "offended," like being offended is an unnatural reaction to things we, humans, don't like. Sure, you can say I'm offended, but frankly, I believe it was stupid to say that he wanted to watch Black people specifically. He CAN say it, and I can't stop him from saying it, but of course I'm gonna call him the funk out on it.

 

Get out of here with my PC Liberal crap? How am I being anything other than keen on his word choice?

 

I'm not saying he HAS to change, I'm raising a critique that it's stupid how he specifically has to call them Black, and doesn't leave it up to the reader even to determine what race they perceive them as. Obviously, if he were describing a specific person who was important, then yes, knowing they were Black could point out biases in certain situations. This isn't the case here, where he just makes Black the main adjective used to describe them. Is he enforcing the stereotype that all Black men play basketball?

 

Why is it weird to be Black? Why is it so different to be Black rather than White? Why do we have to say Black, but don't have to say White?

 

By the way, being offended is a two-way street. If your high horse is so well-groomed that you think you can tell me not to say something, even after describing (poorly) that telling someone what to say is bad, you've got another thing coming.

 

Whether we know the men are Black or not does not affect how we view the story. Describing that you SPECIFICALLY wanted to see the Black people, not the Whites or the Asians, is honestly just awkward, and makes him look like he's either trying to pacify Black people by saying "hey look I'm inclusive of u!!!!!!!!" or he mistakenly sees Black people as a race of superhumans who are good at basketball, wear gold chains, and rap.

 

Of course, he's a little man, I'm a little man, and you're a little person, too. None of what he says or I say or you say is going to destroy any of our lives.

 

And frankly, It's 9/11. Black people and culture have nothing to do with 9/11.

 

sheet like that is neither "liberal" nor really "PC", it's just a bizarre overreaction to an adjective.

It is an out of place adjective. Whether the men are Black or not doesn't really affect how we view the story.

 

Not to mention adjectives are evil in large numbers and it's why I tl;dred the entirety of the article after the "MAKE SURE YOU KNOW THESE ARE BLACK GUYS" part.

 

I spent less than 5 minutes writing that post. I don't know why people are beginning to take this out of proportion.

[cr47t]

Please, people, let's not start a flamewar here.

[ihop]

You're the one writing half a page about it, if anyone's taking it out of proportion it's you. It's literally just a line in an article describing the surroundings, you're reading waaay too far into this.

[Snatch Steal]

You're the one writing half a page about it, if anyone's taking it out of proportion it's you. It's literally just a line in an article describing the surroundings, you're reading waaay too far into this.

I'm not writing a page to counter the writer of the article, I instead wanted to explain my reasoning for calling him out on it to someone who seemed to be attacking and labeling me, neither of which I appreciate given my stance on arguments and past failures in such.

 

I did mention, also, at least once, that I can't change his word choice. And that I'll forget about this tomorrow. Frankly, I'm tired of all this "You're a PC SJW!" And "You're an alt-right KKK racist!" sheet, which was addressed in the first article that I guess Mrs. Fanfiction didn't even pore over.

 

I admit, maybe I was in the heat of the moment, and phrased my critique in a way that seemed violent and hyperbolic. Despite that, I've made a vow not to go back on my convictions or beliefs once I've made them, and whether or not I still hold them as fast, I'll still argue them with every fiber of my being.

 

I should take a break.

[Resident Fascist]

I'm not exactly sure why it's only a moment of condolences for the victims of 9/11 or Terrorism in the Western world, rather than the victims of terrorism around the world. All I can say is your typical lest we forget stuff. 

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I think the more offensive thing is Obama vetoing the 9/11 Justice bill

[cr47t]

People, can we not start a flamewar here, nor politicize the thread too much?

[Snatch Steal]

People, can we not start a flamewar here, nor politicize the thread too much?

 

You said this two hours ago, and no flame wars have started, nor have any signs of flame wars popped up. Idk man.

 

I think the more offensive thing is Obama vetoing the 9/11 Justice bill

 

 

"Even if Mr. Obama vetoes the bill, it’s possible Congress might have the votes to override his veto."^[1]

 

I guess we can hope for the best.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

You said this two hours ago, and no flame wars have started, nor have any signs of flame wars popped up. Idk man.

 

 

 

 

"Even if Mr. Obama vetoes the bill, it’s possible Congress might have the votes to override his veto."^[1]

 

I guess we can hope for the best.

Seeing that it passed unanimously, they have more than enough to override a veto. The problem there is these families have waited too long already, and they don't need nor should wait any longer for justice

 

As for the sea Hawks. It's tacky af for millionaires to take a piss on men and women who died so mercilessly. It's their right, but it's an jabroni thing to do

[cr47t]

You said this two hours ago, and no flame wars have started, nor have any signs of flame wars popped up. Idk man.

I was worried this was going to spiral into a political flamewar of sorts. I said it again because I felt like I needed to.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

I will say what I always say about remembering 9/11.

 

It is important to honor the innocent lives lost, as well as the heroes on flight 93 who gave their lives to save so many more. But in honoring these people, we must be careful not to succumb to hatred. Not to seek vengeance upon the culture that the hijackers belonged to. Not to match blood with blood. The 9/11 attacks were not a military strike. They were acts of terrorism. An emotional strike on developed nations the world over, to think that such a disaster could kill nearly 3,000 people, orchestrated by less than 20.

 

To hate Islam, or the middle east, or even each other when disagreements are had over this horrible day, is only helping this terrorism to achieve its goal. We shouldn't want to bomb cities full of innocents, we shouldn't be barring entry into our nations to individuals who have lost far more to terrorism than ourselves.

 

This isn't us vs them. This is everyone vs their own fear. This isn't a battle won with bombs, bullets, or borders. The only way to win this is to band together to make reparations. The world needs to heal.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

When 50+% of Americans Muslims think Sharia law should replace American law, I'm gonna have to disgaree with you there Giga

 

There is a very credible threat of Islamic non-integration that scares people

[cr47t]

When 50+% of Americans Muslims think Sharia law should replace American law, I'm gonna have to disgaree with you there Giga

And where did you find this?

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

And where did you find this?

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/youll-be-shocked-with-how-many-american-muslims-want-sharia-law/

 

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

[Snatch Steal]

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/youll-be-shocked-with-how-many-american-muslims-want-sharia-law/

 

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

 

The results are indeed shocking, but I question the viability. Overzealous exclamation marks tend to be the trademark of unprofessional people, for one, and the article was written by a user named "SOOPERMEXICAN". 

 

And as for the poll itself, the site which it came from notes that 600 Muslim people were surveyed.^[1]

 

± 300 people who support Sharia law isn't good, but the pool of people was rather low, and I wonder if the sites were biased. Not to say Islam doesn't need reform.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

The results are indeed shocking, but I question the viability. Overzealous exclamation marks tend to be the trademark of unprofessional people, for one, and the article was written by a user named "SOOPERMEXICAN". 

 

And as for the poll itself, the site which it came from notes that 600 Muslim people were surveyed.^[1]

 

± 300 people who support Sharia law isn't good, but the pool of people was rather low, and I wonder if the sites were biased. Not to say Islam doesn't need reform.

Yeah I'll def give you that. 

 

 

Not America, but those are scary percentages, and, IMO, a valid reason to be skeptical about people coming in from those regions 

 

If Christian law and Hindu law is toxic for their views on homosexuality and such (which they are), Islam def needs to get it's game in order. Islam is growing at a rate of Hinduism+Christianity atm, they'll be a majority by the end of a century, if they don't reform now, our way of life will end

[Resident Fascist]

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/youll-be-shocked-with-how-many-american-muslims-want-sharia-law/

 

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

 

Muslims in America. Just Muslims. It's also a conscious choice. If they made the choice to be governed according to that set of rules, and are not impeding upon other's rights, what's the overall problem? I mean, yes, I think it's pretty barbaric and outdated, but making the decision as a conscious human is different to being born into a country that enforces it or being forced to follow it. 

 

I will say what I always say about remembering 9/11.

 

It is important to honor the innocent lives lost, as well as the heroes on flight 93 who gave their lives to save so many more. But in honoring these people, we must be careful not to succumb to hatred. Not to seek vengeance upon the culture that the hijackers belonged to. Not to match blood with blood. The 9/11 attacks were not a military strike. They were acts of terrorism. An emotional strike on developed nations the world over, to think that such a disaster could kill nearly 3,000 people, orchestrated by less than 20.

 

To hate Islam, or the middle east, or even each other when disagreements are had over this horrible day, is only helping this terrorism to achieve its goal. We shouldn't want to bomb cities full of innocents, we shouldn't be barring entry into our nations to individuals who have lost far more to terrorism than ourselves.

 

 

I mean, that's exactly what happened. Which is a shame, our reaction as the Western world to 9/11 and other acts of Islamism-inspired terrorism is absolutely shameful. Rather than actually take the blame and admit, while these actions were horrible, and innocent people in our countries have died, and that's horrible, but we share part of the blame for barging into the Middle East's business for the past 50 to 60 years, and then be complete and utter hypocrites by barging in even further and essentially just looping the cycle. The Second Iraq War was the most pointless waste of life on both sides in the past 60 odd years. 

 

 There is no excuse for terrorism and I fully feel we should give condolences to victims of terrorism not only in America and the Western world, but all the way around the world. 3,000 innocent Americans being killed is horrible. But, in comparison, we've let the Middle East do far more bleeding of our own fault. To continue to go on a completely "just" crusade to put an end to terrorism just makes us as bad. The only real way to end terrorism is on the ground, with the support of the people. But unfortunately, we seem to suck at that, and just end up creating more terrorists than actually ending them.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

I can't help but feel sometimes that "remembering the victims" sort of falls in line with the terrorists' desires.

[Dad]

I can't help but feel sometimes that "remembering the victims" sort of falls in line with the terrorists' desires.

 

While I get what you're saying, that's like suggesting we shouldn't give a sheet about our people.  It was a national tragedy.  It's going to be written down in history books for years to come, and taught in our schools.  So as far as remembering the victims goes, there won't ever be an opportunity for us to forget them.

[(GigaDrillBreaker)]

While I get what you're saying, that's like suggesting we shouldn't give a sheet about our people.  It was a national tragedy.  It's going to be written down in history books for years to come, and taught in our schools.  So as far as remembering the victims goes, there won't ever be an opportunity for us to forget them.

This year is the first year high school students will be taught about the event, without having been alive when it happened.

[Delibirb]

I would guess my generation was one if the last if not the very last to have been old enough to remember it happening. I was four, so though may not have understood the implications, I remember my mom getting the call from my dad to turn on the news, her pulling me over to the couch to watch in (her) horror.