The word “unique” is overused, but I think my experience on 9/11/01 may have been unique. I was actually on a plane, flying from Charlotte to Houston, when the first plane hit the World Trade Center. There were thousands of people in the air when the attacks happened, but what made my case unusual was that I was traveling on a business trip with a coworker, who happened to be Muslim.
The pilot did not immediately tell us what had actually happened. Instead, he announced that there was an air traffic control problem in New York, and that we had been instructed to land at the nearest airport, which happened to be New Orleans. He put the plane into the steepest descent I have ever experienced, as he headed towards the airport. I was personally convinced that there must have been some mechanical problem with the plane, and that he had made up the air traffic control problem to spare us the terror of anticipating a crash landing. It made no sense that a New York problem would require us to make an unscheduled landing, and even if it did, why would he make such a steep descent? I had mentally prepared myself for a crash landing, and possible death. Of course, he did pull out of the steep descent, and landed in New Orleans without incident.
Only when we were on the ground and were taxiing toward the gate did he explain the real reason, and even then the information was not totally correct. He announced that two planes had hit the two World Trade Center buildings, and a third had hit the White House. There was no mention of the Pentagon. Looking back, I realized how utterly confused and chaotic the situation must have been. The authorities did an excellent job, in the circumstances, of getting all of the many planes safely on the ground, with no other accidents or incidents.
We left the plane through the jetway in the usual way. The wing of the terminal where we entered had already been completely evacuated. The only people present, besides ourselves, were a large number of police. We were instructed to walk through the terminal in single file, without stopping, and were strictly order not to speak to anyone. I had been in this wing many times, and it was an eerie sensation to walk through a perfectly quiet and deserted building, which is normally bustling with thousands of people.
We made it through the wing, into the center of the airport building, and found total chaos. All arriving passengers had been funneled into this area, and a huge crowd of confused, frightened people was milling around.
My first thought was to find a rental car, and possibly continue the trip to Houston by driving. I went from one car rental counter to another, but all had been sold out. Finally, the last counter had one or two cars left, and I was able to book one on a one-way trip to Houston.
Next, I made my way to a pay phone, and called my wife to let her know I was all right. (I did not own a cell phone at the time.) There were long lines at the pay phones, but everyone was very orderly and patient. I waited in one line until I was able to make the call. It turned out that she had not had the TV or radio on, and knew nothing about what was happening, so I was the first one to give her the information. She turned the TV on while we were talking, and watched some of the reporting. We talked for just a few minutes, then I gave up the phone so that someone else could make a call.
Finally, I decided to attempt to find the coworker with whom I was traveling. Knowing that I had gotten one of the last few cars, I thought that he might not be able to find a car, and be stuck in New Orleans with no way to get to Houston. Although we were going to different meetings in Houston, we could at least drive over together, and he should be able to find a car in Houston. The area around the car rental desks was crowded and chaotic, and I thought I might not be able to locate him, but after a few minutes of searching, I saw him in the crowd. We picked up the rental car and set out on a six-hour drive, going west on I-10. Fortunately, the highway was near the airport, and we were on our way pretty quickly.
Of course, we immediately turned on the car radio, and listened to the coverage of the events. At first, most of it was just speculation, but before long the authorities had somehow pieced together some of the facts, and figured that Al Qaida was probably behind the attacks. Within a few hours, Bin Laden’s name was even mentioned in connection with the attacks. In any case, it seemed likely that they had been conducted by Islamic terrorists.
We drove in silence for a long time, listening to the reports. I was stunned, saddened, and worried about what this would mean for the future, so I was lost in my own thoughts, and in no mood to talk.
Suddenly, my coworker, who had been riding quietly, burst out with, “This would never have happened if it wasn’t for the US policy towards Israel!”
I was so surprised that all I could say was, “What?”
He went on in that vein for a few minutes. As he saw it, the US favored Israel in everything they did, it was a very bad policy, no wonder people were upset, this was a natural response to the bad actions of the US. Now, this fellow was a very intelligent and highly educated man. He had come to the US for graduate school, and had spent several years obtaining a PhD. He then worked for a large company in Los Angeles for five years before coming to our company a year or so earlier. He spoke perfect English, and seemed to be totally immersed in the culture of the US. But, somehow he had managed to maintain this extraordinarily warped attitude about the US and our politics.
After listening in stunned silence for a few minutes, I lost control, and basically told him to shut up, that I didn’t want to hear any more. We drove the rest of the way in silence. I dropped him off at a car rental counter in Houston, and did not see him again until we both returned home.
The actual events of the day of 9/11 were bad enough, but here is what has really stuck with me for the last ten years: after this event, we worked together for another couple of years, before he transferred to another location. In all that time, we never discussed it again. He never apologized for his outburst, or indicated that perhaps there might be another side to the question. He never condemned the attacks, or indicated that he regretted them. In fact, he never spoke negatively about terrorism at all.
I live in a small- to medium-sized city, but we have a fairly large and elaborate mosque. There is a local imam who is pretty well-known in the area. He publishes articles in the local paper periodically, calling for peace and brotherhood, or explaining elements of the Muslim faith. But as far as I know, he has never condemned any of the Muslim terror attacks, including the events of 9/11. My next-door neighbors are Muslims, and are wonderful people, but they have never commented on these issues. Before I retired, I worked with several other Muslim colleagues, most of whom I had great respect for. But again, I have never heard any of them speak out against Muslim-sponsored terrorism.
This, I think, is a major problem that the Muslim community in the US has not addressed. Until Muslims who live here are ready to openly and vigorously condemn the type of violence perpetrated on 9/11 and since then, there will always be an air of suspicion and hostility towards them. Like my neighbors, I think most of them are fine people and good Americans. But, this attitude just reinforces the belief on the part of many Americans that they cannot be trusted. In this atmosphere, one more attack, like that of Major Hasan, causes that belief to harden to the point that it will be almost impossible to change.
There is an article in my newspaper today, quoting several local Muslims as saying that they are being targeted for special attention by law enforcement officials. To be fair, one local doctor does say that he teaches his children that “…our religion does not, by any means, allow us to kill innocent women and children.” But, most of the article consists of complaints about the additional focus on Muslims.
Do they really not understand why this is happening?
Uncle Bill is a retired engineer, happily living in Almost Heaven, West Virginia. He grew up in Pittsburgh, and is (sadly) a life-long Pirates fan. Like many people, he was fairly liberal as a youth, but with age came wisdom, and he gradually became a staunch conservative.
A thought provoking, touching piece, thank you for writing this olefins.
I too wonder why American Muslims don’t speak out more about the terrorist activities carried out in the name of their religion. It isn’t hard to find a Christian that condemns Warren Jeffs and his ilk.
olefins
thank you for a life story event that is yes unique as there is so many of them,
enough to make a book,
my nature was to feel horrified of such action, from the first moment,
I saw the tv report and vision of that massacre,and learned of the guilty ones,
how they disregard the value of life, and stood ready to commit such murder of
the good people, they hate for no reason, except to deny the AMERICANS QUEST TO FREEDOM,how you must have felt to hear that person core mentality, that make him an accessory to the crime by associating to them and their hate, he was and probably still is in AMERICA, benefiting of the
largesse and freedom of AMERICA LIKE MANY OTHER, and the like of those who are leaning to
their belief by association and friendship of coworking which develop over time usuely and naturaly,
for many non MUSLIMS, and the circle get bigger around them pretending to be good AMERICANS, except for their soul which don’t belong.
Nicely written piece. I’m struck, however by what you got out of your experience with your coworker. When he, a Muslim who apparently grew up in that culture, declared his understanding of the reason for the attack, instead of asking him to explain his statement and maybe broadening your own understanding, you essentially told him that you weren’t interested in anything he had to say.. Why would you do that, I wonder? Did you then – or do you now – have some special insight into Muslim culture and recent events in the Middle East that allow you to contradict what your coworker said? Doesn’t sound like it to me. I’d say you passed up a golden opportunity.
Thanks you for this article. I have just returned from London and Dublin and what an education about Muslims I got in London. We stayed at a US Hotel near Marble Arch in London and the entire area was full of Muslim restarurants with their Sisha pipes and ladies in Burqas. I had twin blond 20 year old daughters and was totally un aware of the population in this area. We wher in Ireland on 9/11 but came to discover that this area was closed off dut to Muslim demonstrations on 9/11. Let’s be clear, it was Muslims who killed us on 9/11, it was Muslims who danced in the streets on that day and every anniversary, and it is Muslims who hate us!! News flash, I HATE you even more for what you did I hope you one day meet your god (note little g) in HELL!!
AJ Hill,
you should know by now how the CONSERVATIVES ‘S SELF DISCIPLINE, AND GOOD JUDGE IN A SITUATION HE WAS THERE HEARING IT IN HIS CAR, HE PREFER NOT TO KILL THIS MUSLIM, BUT I’m sure it cross his mind, this emergency, which was extreme, you normaly think of who died and the event, so,
it was kind of unfair for you to bump the AUTHOR, WHEN YOU DON’T KNOW THE SITUATION HE WAS IN,
TRYING TO GET WHERE HIS BUSYNESS WAS AS FAST AS HE COULD.
you seem to always put your feet in your mouth or on your keyboard,
we know that from previous attacks, but we are not your kind of people
and we never get use to that nasty comment.
@AJ Hill: AJ, very eloquent and I still hate them. Thanks for correcting my grammer, obviously your words are more important to you than any message. Remember it was Mulims who killed Americans on 9/11 and Muslims who danced in the street on our innocent lives. Prove me wrong!!
@Common Sense: You’re welcome for the correction. As for your assertion about words, you’re wrong. Words are the message; and, when we lose our respect for words and their meaning, we jeopardize our understanding of the message.
Case in point: You say that you hate “Muslims” for what “they” did on 9-11, but in fact it was only some Muslims. The qualification isn’t ornamental, it’s an essential part of the truth of what happened on that day. Your blanket condemnation of Muslims is both irrational and (in my opinion) immoral, because it continues the cycle of unreason. When the friends and families of innocent Muslims killed in retribution for 9-11 declare a similar hatred for Americans and when they act on that hatred, what can you say to contradict them? Nothing. It’s madness.
Now prove me wrong.
@AJ Hill: Just keep your head in the sand and dring the Kool Aid. Ingnorance is bliss my friend!!
@Common Sense: You would know!
AJ, under the circumstances, I can empathize with not only the OP, but also Common Sense. In the OP, on that day it would have been hard for any American to try and discuss the events from the “muslim” point of view.
Should he have listened? Maybe, but then again what would he have learned. The OP clearly states that the muslim in the story was blaming America for being friends with Israel. Exactly how can one rationally explain that feeling?
Just think of Common Sense’s view being like that of Juan Williams on his being afraid or apprehensive around some Muslims after 9-11.
And AJHill’s view reflects that of the head of NPR when they fired Juan on account of expressing a FEELING.
Political Correctness has quickly moved from ”correct words,” to “correct THINKING and FEELING.”
Juan only expressed a FEELING and a a personal one that no one had to relate to or against.
But he was fired for expressing his FEELING.
No.
In a ”Land of the Free,” people must be freely allowed to express themselves.
Even if their feelings are based on hasty generalizations, as Juan admitted at the time, his were.
PC must never be allowed to morph into ….
crimestop – Orwell’s definition: “The faculty of stopping short at the threshold of any dangerous thought.
crimethink – To even consider any thought not in line with the principles of PC. All crimes begin with a thought. So, if you control thought, you can control crime. “Thoughtcrime is death. Thoughtcrime does not entail death, Thoughtcrime is death…. The essential crime that contains all others in itself.”
duckspeak – To speak without thinking. to speak from feelings.
goodthinker – One who strongly adheres to all of the principles of PC.
Newspeak – “politically correct” speech taken to its maximum extent.
Newspeak is based on standard English, but all words describing “unorthodox” political ideas have been removed. In addition, there was an attempt to remove the overall number of words in general, to limit the range of ideas that could be expressed.
The most important aim of newspeak was to provide a means of speaking that required no thought what-so-ever. It uses abbreviations or clipped conjunctions in order to mask or alter a word’s true meaning.
Reducing the number of words also removes any literary value to writing, because there would only be one distinct way to present any particular concept. It would be impossible to write a book like Common Sense , Uncle Tom’s Cabin, or even 1984 in Newspeak. Not only would the correct words for certain concepts not be available, but a lack of adjectives would cause the writing would be completely bland and unemotional, which in itself would keep people from reading at all.
oldthink – Holding on to old ideas and patterns of thought not consistent with current government policy (Ingsoc). Maintaining a belief that is no longer acceptable, but was normal just a few years prior.
And so on see the entire Newspeak Dictionary here.
http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns-dict.html
@AJ Hill: Your correct, many of your kind display their ignorance often enough it’s easy recognize. Sad but easy.
that meme is backwards.
it isnt and never was what did we do to deserve 911,
it is, and was,~~ what is wrong with muslim culture to produce such murderous goblins willing to specifically target and kill so many innocent people in 911 and or all the other attacks across the globe in the last ten years.
@ilovebeeswarzone:
I’ve been advised to lay off you, because of your inadequate command of English. For a long time I’ve done just that without being prompted, but not entirely because of the language issue. If one has the patience to dig through your tortured syntax and compound malapropisms, it’s clear that you’re a nutcase. This particular post illustrates that better than most. I’m supposed to give the author of this piece credit , because he didn’t kill his passenger for expressing an opinion? That’s disgusting! If you really believe that, you’re even sicker than I thought.
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!” Evelyn Beatrice Hall in a paraphrase of Voltaire.
Curious, isn’t it, that with all the liberty-loving conservatives on this site, I’m the one who has to stick up for freedom of speech!
@Nan G: I condemned the author of this piece for two reasons:
(1) He was morally wrong to suppress another’s right to speak. Read the article again, if you need to: olefins told his passenger to “shut up!” He wasn’t just expressing his own feelings, as Juan Williams did, but acting on those feelings. There’s a big difference.
(2) He was intellectually wrong to reject information that may have helped him to understand what had happened. Was the motivation of the 9-11 attackers obvious at the time? I don’t think so. Olefins was under no obligation to agree with what his Muslim passenger told him. He certainly didn’t have to agree that the 9-11 attackers’ reasons were adequate or justified. That ‘s not the point. I would say that by virtue of his background the other fellow had far better insight into the prevailing attitudes in the Middle East. To reject an informed opinion in this kind of circumstance is just foolish.
@rumcrook: During the past ten years U.S. forces have killed far more innocent people, Muslim and otherwise,than the terrorists have. (They just don’t have our capacity for destruction.) If you can answer the question why we’ve been willing to do this, maybe you’ll have a start on answering your own.
@Common Sense:
@Common Sense #6:
It was also Muslims who mourned with us.
@anticsrocks:
I think the feeling is based upon the same kind of anti-Americanism that is prevalent in Howard Zinn liberalism, Ron Paulian blame-America firsters, and parts of the world other than just “Islam hates the west”. And it is mixed in with ethnic/religious identity/loyalty.
@AJ Hill:
Can you provide links that support this opinion? Thanks in advance.
@Wordsmith: I’m surprised you would ask, when this information is so readily available, but here’s a good place to start: Project Censored
You could also try the original ground-breaking report by The Lancet or this one from the New England Journal of Medicine.
A striking and tragic finding of all ot these studies is the number of Iraqis who’ve been killed by the insurgents themselves. Horror begets horror.
BTW: nice link for the Muslims who grieved with us over 9-11. Thanks!
AJ Hill, you shouldn’t forget what you have been told, because I’m not finish with you’re despicable behavior,
to attack here and there as a dog does, because his brain is messed up so much,from all kinds of defections,
I prefer to deal with my errors than the attacks that surpass mine on many degrees,
that’s why you come here don’t you?
well you are not worthy of all the TOLERANT CONSERVATIVES HERE, SO YOU KNOW NOW,
TO WIPE YOUR FEET AS YOU COME, NEXT TIME, SO WE DON’T HAVE TO CLEAN AFTER YOU LEAVE,
rumcrook, yes there is something wrong with that culture, ,
they don’t know the 10 commands of GOD,
if they knew, they would not be consumed from the inside with the flames of hell,
that reflect on their hate, their envy, their greed to conquer the FREE WORLD,
bye
That’s okay Beezy, I don’t think you are a nutcase. When you said:
I see this as you saying that the person riding with this Muslim, who was obviously sympathizing with the terrorists and ignoring the massive loss of innocent lives was compelled to shut him up for fear of hearing any more propaganda. You seem to be looking at it from the point of view of this person aligning himself with the terrorists who WERE taking lives and the person driving did not want to lower himself to their low, cowardly status. So rather than reacting as a muslim, he instead told him to shut up.
Odd how your words can be twisted to try and paint you as a “nutcase.” But then it seems that AJ does like to jump to conclusions and ad hominem attacks are a favored weapon of his.
@AJ Hill:
Wait a minute… Did you just cite that completely discredited Lancet study?
Surely you’re smarter than that. Then again, maybe not.
@Aye:
After Lancet withdrew their backing of the findings of that ”study” I thought most lefties got the memo.
Maybe a few missed it.
anticsrocks, yes you understood the comment I was saying exactly, and AJ Hill does it to many, so I come in on him every time I notice his attacks,and he does not affect my feeling, because he is doing it
willingly to shock his target, to antagonize other as a libtard he is, but the kind that glue to the FA family,
so I play his same game to show him how insulting he can be, but he pretend not to get it, because he want to continue his fun game with us, remember BROB? HE COULD BE HIS FAMILY.
BYE, THANK’S
BTW, I’m in a process of moving and it.s hard work, and the reconnections will delay longer than I anticipated, so,
if you don’t hear from me after a while, I’ll just be waiting to be rewired
and unpacking in the mean time, bye
AJ Hill, don’t think for a minute that you stick up for freedom of speech, because you try to shot all of us our freedom of speech, and we always had from CURT the freedom of speech long before you came in to make trouble to the authors first and the commenter, so you are not sticking up for freedom of speech,
you don’t even know what it means
@ilovebeeswarzone: Anytime Beezy! And good luck with your move.
anticsrocks
thamk you my friend
@Nan G: Both you and Aye miss the point entirely. Wordsmith asked for documentation of my contention that U.S. forces had killed far more innocent civilians than the terrorists have. I gave him multiple sources
that demonstrated that fact, but made no representation about the actual figures. If you had taken the trouble to follow all of the links I provided, you would have seen that they included a wide range of estimates, including some (in the NEJM article) based on the very conservative Iraqi Body Count project. None of these contradicted what I stated in my post.
So what exactly is your point? That U.S. forces haven’t killed innocent civilians? That they haven’t killed more than the terrorists have? Do you have a point?
@AJ Hill: What is YOUR point? Why bring that up? Is it your intention to denigrate the sacrifice and honorable service of the men and women in our military?
Every war has casualties, and every war has as some of those casualties, innocent civilians. That is a dreadful, but unavoidable fact of war.
However, I believe you miss the bigger point which is – had the terrorists NOT attacked the United States, there would be no civilian casualties – killed by American military OR terrorists.
AJ Hill, what side are you,? what’s you’re point?
@AJ Hill:
I asked, not because I’m unfamiliar with the studies you linked to, but because I wondered if maybe you were drawing from source studies that I wasn’t familiar with.
Opinion Research Business:
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/beyond/exaggerated-orb/
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/05/discredited-lancet-study-gets-even-more-discredited/
And that’s the thing: Insurgents and Jihadis are the ones doing most of the killing of innocents. So when you say,
I have a problem with this statement. You might make the case that if not for U.S. involvement/interference in Iraq and Afghanistan the body count would not be there- that the U.S. is indirectly involved in those deaths. Of course, by that logic, as anticsrocks points out, had al Qaeda not attacked us on 9/11, chances are, the Muslim world would not have experienced the “blowback” of U.S. military intervention.
Certainly, you don’t claim that U.S. and allied forces have intentionally targeted innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan as opposed to going after insurgents, terrorists, and “deadenders”, do you?
Medved:
Thanks for clicking the link and checking it out.
@AJ Hill:
Actually, no, I didn’t miss your point entirely.
What I did was to point out that you carelessly cited a source that has been completely discredited.
Furthermore, Project Censored relies on that discredited Lancet survey thus, it is easily discredited as well.
The final source you cite, NEJM, makes no distinction as to who caused the deaths of the civilians whose bodies they attempted to enumerate. Yes, they attempt to separate out cause of death, but they make no attempt to delineate between those caused by US troops versus terrorists.
Furthermore, the NEJM source makes no attempt to determine if the bodies they are enumerating are indeed civilian or if they were terrorists.
So, back to your original point:
Errr….No, you didn’t. The argument that you raise here has NOT been proven.
In fact, you have not even effectively argued your point at all since NONE of the source materials you cite separate out the number of “innocent people” supposedly killed by US forces over the last ten years versus the total number of “innocent people” killed by terrorists.
Actually, what you have unwittingly done instead is disprove your own point.
From your NEJM source:
Upon examination of the NEJM chart you will notice that it’s fairly easy to separate out which causes of death (Method) can be attributed strictly to coalition forces ie Air attack and which methods can be attributed strictly to terrorists ie Roadside bomb. It is also fairly easy to determine which causes of death are gray areas ie Mortar fire and Small-arms gunfire that are not possible to extrapolate into coalition versus terrorist.
For the purposes of our discussion, I have included the “gray area” causes of death in the coalition numbers.
The highlighted causes of death ie Execution, Roadside bomb, etc. are methods which clearly cannot be attributed to coalition forces.
Working from the NEJM total number of civilian deaths [60,481] and subtracting out the causes of death that clearly cannot be attributed to coalition forces [42,639] you are left with a remaining number of 17,842 which includes all of the gray area (ie Mortar fire, Small-arms gunfire) totals, an indeterminate number of which should also be attributed to terrorists.
Clearly 42,639 is a much higher number than 17,842.
In short, your NEJM source disproves your contention that “During the past ten years U.S. forces have killed far more innocent people, Muslim and otherwise,than the terrorists have.”
Aye going for the kill. 😉
Hearing the Muslim point of view–that it’s because of our support for Israel–would have been meaningless. We’ve all heard it a thousand times. It’s irrational and based on falsehoods. Actually, it’s based on Jew-hate.
Not wanting to hear another repetition of such nonsense on 9-11 is perfectly reasonable.