Insensitve posts in 'empathy' threads

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I remember waking up early on the morning of September 11, 2001 from a phone call from my Dad. He asked me if I had heard the news of an airplane the struck one the World Trade Center buildings. Once I was up and turned on the news, I watched the second airliner fly into the the second tower. With the first strike, I thought maybe it was a distraught pilot or a malfunction, but the second strike made it painfully clear it was deliberate and collaborative.

A million thoughts raced through my mind, a million questions. Why didn't we have fighter jets in the air? How did these hijackers manage to get through airport security? How were they able to know how to fly these huge jets with such accuracy? Why didn't our intelligence know about such a well planned out scheme? I could not understand the absurdity of how something like this could be successfully carried out against the only standing military superpower in the world. This horrific tragedy could have been prevented, but we failed on so many levels to protect ordinary citizens from such an attack.

...........

August 15, 2006

President George W. Bush

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

Like all Americans, I am grateful for the work of the British intelligence service, combined with the swift response by authorities across the globe, to prevent what could have been a major terrorist attack last week. Unfortunately, in the more than two years since the bipartisan 9/11 Commission released its report, the Administration has failed to implement many of its most important recommendations and still seems to suffer from the "failure of imagination" that the 9/11 Commission identified. As a result, there are too many glaring gaps in our security efforts here at home.

From improving security for our rail and transit systems and our chemical plants, to increasing cargo screening in our airports and ports, the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission have been underfunded, or worse, ignored. Indeed, the 9/11 Commission gave the Administration dismal marks - 5 F's and 12 D's - on the implementation of the Commission's recommendations for homeland security.

Over the past year and a half, I have joined my Democratic colleagues in the Senate on numerous occasions to fight for funding to ensure that Americans are protected from the next generation of terrorist attacks. However, our efforts have been consistently thwarted by the party controlling the White House and Congress:

• In July 2005, just a week after the London subway bombings, Sen. Byrd proposed adding $1.2 billion for transit security grants and $265 million for rail security to the FY 2006 Homeland Security appropriations bill. Sen. Schumer also offered amendments to improve the screening of air cargo and to track the shipment of hazardous materials. All three amendments were rejected by Senate Republicans.
• In March 2006, during the consideration of the FY 2007 Budget Resolution, Sen. Lieberman offered a comprehensive amendment to increase homeland security spending that included $1 billion for rail and transit security, $752 million for aviation security, and $150 million for chemical security. This amendment was rejected by Senate Republicans. Sen. Menendez also offered an amendment to increase funding for port security by $965 million. This, too, was rejected by Senate Republicans.
• And just last month, during the consideration of the FY 2007 Homeland Security appropriations bill, Sen. Schumer and Sen. Biden offered amendments to increase funding for rail and transit security, but these amendments were also rejected by Senate Republicans.

In short, Congress' failure to adequately fund homeland security has left our nation vulnerable to attacks.

The Administration also has submitted budgets that have called for decimating programs for first responders. This year, the Administration's budget proposed eliminating the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program and cutting funds for Emergency Management Performance Grants, both critical sources of homeland funds for our communities.

I am also disappointed that the Administration has not taken a lead in pushing for balanced and robust chemical plant security legislation, as Sen. Lautenberg and I have proposed. Five years after September 11, our nation's unguarded chemical plants remain tempting targets for terrorists.

In the days after 9/11, the nation was prepared to join together to shore up our defenses and fight the very real terrorist threat we are facing. Unfortunately, that strong sense of national purpose has been tossed aside in favor of partisanship and political brinkmanship. As a result, we are woefully unprepared today on a number of fronts, including rail, port, chemical plant, and cargo security.

Now more than ever, we need to come together to address the real security needs of the nation. I hope the White House and Congress can work to immediately address the 9/11 Commission recommendations and provide adequate funding to guard against terrorist attacks.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama

United States Senator

[no name 1]

I remember waking up early on the morning of September 11, 2001 from a phone call from my Dad. He asked me if I had heard the news of an airplane the struck one the World Trade Center buildings. Once I was up and turned on the news, I watched the second airliner fly into the the second tower. With the first strike, I thought maybe it was a distraught pilot or a malfunction, but the second strike made it painfully clear it was deliberate and collaborative.

A million thoughts raced through my mind, a million questions. Why didn't we have fighter jets in the air? How did these hijackers manage to get through airport security? How were they able to know how to fly these huge jets with such accuracy? Why didn't our intelligence know about such a well planned out scheme? I could not understand the absurdity of how something like this could be successfully carried out against the only standing military superpower in the world. This horrific tragedy could have been prevented, but we failed on so many levels to protect ordinary citizens from such an attack.

...........

August 15, 2006

President George W. Bush

The White House

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

Like all Americans, I am grateful for the work of the British intelligence service, combined with the swift response by authorities across the globe, to prevent what could have been a major terrorist attack last week. Unfortunately, in the more than two years since the bipartisan 9/11 Commission released its report, the Administration has failed to implement many of its most important recommendations and still seems to suffer from the "failure of imagination" that the 9/11 Commission identified. As a result, there are too many glaring gaps in our security efforts here at home.

From improving security for our rail and transit systems and our chemical plants, to increasing cargo screening in our airports and ports, the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission have been underfunded, or worse, ignored. Indeed, the 9/11 Commission gave the Administration dismal marks - 5 F's and 12 D's - on the implementation of the Commission's recommendations for homeland security.

Over the past year and a half, I have joined my Democratic colleagues in the Senate on numerous occasions to fight for funding to ensure that Americans are protected from the next generation of terrorist attacks. However, our efforts have been consistently thwarted by the party controlling the White House and Congress:

• In July 2005, just a week after the London subway bombings, Sen. Byrd proposed adding $1.2 billion for transit security grants and $265 million for rail security to the FY 2006 Homeland Security appropriations bill. Sen. Schumer also offered amendments to improve the screening of air cargo and to track the shipment of hazardous materials. All three amendments were rejected by Senate Republicans.
• In March 2006, during the consideration of the FY 2007 Budget Resolution, Sen. Lieberman offered a comprehensive amendment to increase homeland security spending that included $1 billion for rail and transit security, $752 million for aviation security, and $150 million for chemical security. This amendment was rejected by Senate Republicans. Sen. Menendez also offered an amendment to increase funding for port security by $965 million. This, too, was rejected by Senate Republicans.
• And just last month, during the consideration of the FY 2007 Homeland Security appropriations bill, Sen. Schumer and Sen. Biden offered amendments to increase funding for rail and transit security, but these amendments were also rejected by Senate Republicans.

In short, Congress' failure to adequately fund homeland security has left our nation vulnerable to attacks.

The Administration also has submitted budgets that have called for decimating programs for first responders. This year, the Administration's budget proposed eliminating the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program and cutting funds for Emergency Management Performance Grants, both critical sources of homeland funds for our communities.

I am also disappointed that the Administration has not taken a lead in pushing for balanced and robust chemical plant security legislation, as Sen. Lautenberg and I have proposed. Five years after September 11, our nation's unguarded chemical plants remain tempting targets for terrorists.

In the days after 9/11, the nation was prepared to join together to shore up our defenses and fight the very real terrorist threat we are facing. Unfortunately, that strong sense of national purpose has been tossed aside in favor of partisanship and political brinkmanship. As a result, we are woefully unprepared today on a number of fronts, including rail, port, chemical plant, and cargo security.

Now more than ever, we need to come together to address the real security needs of the nation. I hope the White House and Congress can work to immediately address the 9/11 Commission recommendations and provide adequate funding to guard against terrorist attacks.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama

United States Senator

My god, you have incredible nerve to bring your issues into this very important REMEBRANCE, non-political thread. Is nothing sacred?

----

I can't put what today means into words.

Edited September 11, 2008 by illumine

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

My god, you have incredible nerve to bring your issues into this very important REMEBRANCE, non-political thread. Is nothing sacred?

my thoughts too.

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, I saw it, and I agree that it was a bit out of line, but posting about it in the rememberance thread is probably equally tacky. Maybe the best line of approach is to ask one of the mods to blot out part of the thread?

My 10c.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well citing quotes by a political candidate in a 9/11 thread probably isn't the best idea, but actually reading it - it simply appears that Steven is saying that the tragedy is one that could have been avoided. In that respect - Obama's letter asking the President to implement the 9/11 commission recommendations in their entirety isn't really out of context. And its not like Obama is unique in calling for it...

Edited September 11, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[Peikko 1,575]

I think it's one of those damned if you do posts to be honest. What's the use of 'what if's' to the dead?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think it's one of those damned if you do posts to be honest. What's the use of 'what if's' to the dead?

Well none really - but addressing security concerns that could prevent a future incident has some relevance - esp. when people stand behind slogans like "never again".

[Peikko 1,575]

A place to discuss this? yes, in the thread itself? No.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't read it as offering discussion - more just giving his "where I was during 9/11" and pointing out an unresolved issue that deserves some awareness.

Of course some people will read that as blame on the part of GWB, but that's inevitable given the context - but I suppose the judgement to know where and when it is appropriate to pick fights is what is missing here.

Its a far cry from Marc's typically ham-handed treatment last year of posting photographs of bodies falling out of the buildings and jumping on inoccuous comments about "I can't imagine what it must have been like".

Edited September 11, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[Peikko 1,575]

What a difference a year makes. Anyway, if anyone wants to comment on anything that was posted 'in there' I think this is a more appropriate thread to do so, hence why I started it. I think it would be nice to keep the in memoriam thread strictly to topic.

[TayRivers 4]

Everyone is entitled to remember 9/11 as they wish. Others may not like they way they have chosen to remember but that is their right. 9/11 is and always will be a very political hot potato, and people of every corner of the globe will have different feelings on the subject. Some will think it was Americas wake-up call, other will think it was a long time coming, some will be deeply saddened, some will be forever scarred and some have never heard of the tragedy. The most important thing to remember is the loss of life, both the victims and the terrorists and do all we can to try to ensure it does not happen again.

"Every Pair of Human Eyes See's a Different Light, But Always Keep Them Open, For to Close Them Darkness would Prevail".

[Peikko 1,575]

I totally agree, everyone has a unique perspective. However, it's obvious why the thread was opened and it wasn't to have that discussion or any discussion - one comment went over the line, then people commented on the comment and we all know where that goes.

[Jenn! 918]

Yes, I saw it, and I agree that it was a bit out of line, but posting about it in the rememberance thread is probably equally tacky. Maybe the best line of approach is to ask one of the mods to blot out part of the thread?

My 10c.

Controversial posts have been moved into this thread.

[chri'stina 190]

A place to discuss this? yes, in the thread itself? No.

I don't know if I missed some of it since this thread is here now with posts from there...but in any case, I do agree with you on this one. It's not time to get political in a remembrance thread IMO. Let's remember 9/11 affected people from every party and even non-Americans who were living here or were here for business only from their home countries. It's not time to bring politics into a thread that is simply remembering those people.

Edited September 11, 2008 by Parivar CSK

[Peikko 1,575]

Thanks Jenn! I think