Sept. 11 (meant in the least corny way)

ll=llannah · 11-09-2002 8:52pm #1

hey guys-

as a new yorker, i've kind of been forced to think about the year anniversary of the attacks. Just out of curiosity, I was wondering about your opinions on it- i can interject mine later on if any of u want to discuss it or whatever. And you can say whatever the hell u want- go ahead and bash the US- I, for one, will NOT be stopping you all and in fact probably agreeing with most of the stuff u guys have to say. I hesitated about whether or not to start this thread- but it is a non-spammy one, so what the hell?!

claire h · 11-09-2002 9:26pm

To regurgitate what I posted in another Sept 11 thread, 'cause I'm lazy like that:

Bush is a warmonger and an idiot. He is completely incompetent of ruling a country. ("More and more of our imports are coming from overseas..." Need I say anymore?) How he handled the September 11 attacks was disgusting. He's no better than the terrorists. "OK, some people killed lots of innocent Americans, what will I do? Oh, I know! I'll pick a country that I can blame, and kill lots of their citizens! Yeah, that'll work!"

What's truly scary is that many Americans support his actions and believe that they were justified, and the fact that other leaders are going along with his plans because if they don't, they're at risk of becoming a target. Not a huge risk, in all fairness, but the label 'war on terrorism' is a broad, broad term encompassing almost anything.

Yes, what happened in New York one year ago was tragic, but it doesn't excuse Bush's behaviour, which has led to more death and destruction, or the attitude that the lives of Americans are worth more than any others. Yes, I'm generalising. Don't hit me.

Dalamar · 11-09-2002 9:56pm

Well bush would have to do something, if he didn't he would probably have been replaced, and what should america have done? sit there? if they did do that, they'd make excuses to *destroy* the privacy of your average american citizen with new laws to stop terrorism.....

ll=llannah · 11-09-2002 10:00pm

i won't hit u. i might hug u, tho. lol. i absolutely agree. bush (his name doesn't even DESERVE a capital letter) is an ass who made his way into a really good college because his dad went there and graduated a drunk fratt boy. (which is ok in my book- but not for the freaking president)
well he made everything so much worse. i mean, we've had about 20 years of really selfish interference in the middle east becuase of oil and greediness. we shouldn't have become involved in the mess to begin with. it makes me sick that we could have avoided so many civilian deaths by not getting involved in the first place. (not to mention the rediculous isolationism when we'd supposedly stopped being isolationist a long time ago.)

ll=llannah · 11-09-2002 10:02pm

i just wish he'd never been elected in the first place- but- when i think about gore and lieberman being elected, i can't help but wonder if lieberman being jewish would have made our pro-isreali situation even worse.

claire h · 11-09-2002 10:05pm

Originally posted by Dalamar
what should america have done? sit there?

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." - Gandhi

ll=llannah · 11-09-2002 10:10pm

true- think we could have found a better way. we were so hurt by what happened- we lashed out without with thinking-
but the government is the one who is supposed to be thinking before they act.
it's different for the civillians, especially new yorkers. i mean, my friends and i were on the roof of the school and we saw the first plane fly in. it was absolutely disturbing and so saddening.
but the government is supposed to be able to crisis-manage. but apparently they can't.

Green Hand Guy · 11-09-2002 10:42pm

Personally I think bush is a bumbling idiot who just wants to be like his dad by waging a war on the middle east. I agree with what Clinton said recently about bush. He said something to the effect that bush was trying to control the world rather than lead it and that targetting Iraq would be pointless since they had nothing to do with 9-11.

I don't think Bush should have struck back so violently. There were too many civilian casualties and the only proof he had of the Afghanistan's involvement was a poor quality video tape conveniently found by American marines.

ll=llannah · 11-09-2002 11:35pm

...and who knows where the hell that video came from and who put it together. he took an opportunity and pounced childishly. idiotic really. iit would be funny had it not costed so many lives. had it been a game show (oh my god, i just related something to a game show...you see what this society does to pple's heads? it's simply not healthy) we all would have laughed and said- wow- glad u aren't in charge- you lose! but the sad reality is that- he is in charge and no its not a game. its people's lives.

Plasticman · 12-09-2002 6:04pm

wow, so many people reflecting my views on bush. it's great

i hate the man. he's a small-minded bigot, who is just being used as a puppet by the cabinet. there should have been a strong candidate with a mind of their own, rather than some rich kid idiot who got elected because everyone knew the name (anyone seen "the distinguished gentleman"?? class film). i mean, the man didn't even get the most votes for gods sake. it's times like that when i think that the american electoral system is bull****. but i suppose it's easier than trying PR in a place that big.

anyways, despite the fact i hate him, the man can be funny. not deliberately, of course but still, some great quotes. "we need more power to power the power". always cracks me up. there are some great bushisms. go to:

http://www.bushcartoon.com/bushisms.html

or for pics...

http://bushorchimp.com/pics.html
or
http://bushorchimp.com/pics2.html

ll=llannah · 12-09-2002 6:39pm

you beat me- i was just about to post the bush or chimp url. funny stuff right there. oh- and definitely have a read of the bush-ism books- they are hilarious. (until i realize he's supposed to represent my views.......and then i want to laugh even harder because that is such a stupid thought.)

SOL · 15-09-2002 1:18am

No doubt this will probably have me crucified by all of oyu but,
you should no that more people die in car accidents every day (about 3000) than did in new york, mire people die and live in poverty in third world countries cause of stupid america and the only reason that everyone cares about this is because no america feels afraid, never before had someone struck such an effective blow against them and that is mostly the reason that it has made such a big fuss, they are afraid

Plasticman · 15-09-2002 2:48pm

why crucify you?? i know a great many people (myself included) who agree with you, anlthough, my language would be stronger

ll=llannah · 16-09-2002 2:16am

i agree as well- but they weren't driving cars or in any danger whatsoever as far as they were concerned. they were just going to work. i'm not saying that what happened was the worst thing that ever happened or that we should all weep and sob or any ****e like that, but it is something worth debating. and its a relatively spam free subject, altho many pple here can turn anything into spam...haha.

ll=llannah · 16-09-2002 2:18am

but i agree heartily with everything u said, macdara. u won''t be crucified. at least not by me. but then again, i detest america almost as much as half u guys do.

Green Hand Guy · 16-09-2002 6:10pm

No crucifixion? Now what am I gonna do with that big wooden cross and all those nails.

Honestly though, if anybody deserves to be crucified it's bush. And America isn't that bad. They really gave the british an ass-whoopin' back in the olden days and they invented McDonalds (There's actually a teacher in my school called Ronald McDonald and they won't accept cheques from him in McDonalds). It's just most of the governments in the past couple of decades I can't stand.

ll=llannah · 16-09-2002 8:03pm

ah- i'm sure we'll find someone to crucify... *looking around with squinty eyes* erm...anyway... I'm sure your teacher never hears the end of the dumb cracks. But why would he be writing cheques to McDonalds anyway?!

oq4v3ht0u76kf2 · 16-09-2002 8:31pm

He was on a school trip to France with thirty or so of Northside Dublin's finest... hence McDonalds in Paris thought they were a bit dodgy and when he handed them a travellers cheque with "Ronald McDonald" on it they were a wee bit apprehensive to the tune of not accepting it. I believe the lads had to scrounge around and then wait there whilst one of 'em went back to the hotel to get some cash.

True story.

Dalamar · 18-09-2002 9:21pm

Originally posted by claire h

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." - Gandhi

Indeed, but your enemies don't disappear when you keep on defending, trust me on this. Most (intelligent) self-defense methods involve attacking back.

ll=llannah · 18-09-2002 10:37pm

true that they don't go away- but if everyone eliminated everyone they were enemies with, there would be about two people left. (they would be people who lived in caves their whole lives and never saw a soul.)

Green Hand Guy · 19-09-2002 6:07pm

Yep. People like me.

ll=llannah · 19-09-2002 7:01pm

Cave Conor, eh?

Green Hand Guy · 20-09-2002 8:44pm

Actually I'd call it more of a naturally formed subterranean fortress. It makes me feel better about living in a hole in the ground.

Barry Aldwell · 20-09-2002 8:58pm

Conor does actually live in a hole (hehe) called Clontarf. It's more of a black hole where you go in normal and emerge a snob.

The really funny thing about Ronnie McDonald is that he looks about as far as possible from the McDonalds mascot. And about everywhere he's lived is either a museum or wasteland now.

SOL · 20-09-2002 10:59pm

Originally posted by twix_girl
but i agree heartily with everything u said, macdara. u won''t be crucified. at least not by me. but then again, i detest america almost as much as half u guys do.

If you will hang on a few minutes, green hand guy hand me the cross and nails, you either did this as a prank to piss me off immensely, or just give me an excuse to start moaning again, either way, who's first, you or macdara?

CHRISTYG · 20-09-2002 11:33pm

No disrespect to the New Yorker who started this thread, but a year and a few days after the event, I think it's time for the media-in the UK, Ireland, or wherever-to stop doing reports with "September 11" references in them, because while you can't, and I won't, belittle those horrible events, WHY is it that a year on, you STILL cannot listen to some radio stations, or watch some TV stations (you know who you are!!) without THOSE words being mentioned? You'd almost think there was a cash bonus for the number of mentions of THAT date!!

imp · 21-09-2002 12:34am

I don't really think that the media is giving too much attention to September 11th a year on. You have to realise that it has changed everyone's lives and a lot of things have happened or will happen as a result of it, e.g. the War on Terror is a direct result of it and 9/11 has also had a big impact on the Iraqi situation. I don't think that the news would be being entirely honest if they didn't mention the relevance of September the 11th when talking about these kind of issues.

}:>

Green Hand Guy · 21-09-2002 10:36pm

Conor does actually live in a hole (hehe) called Clontarf. It's more of a black hole where you go in normal and emerge a snob.

Hey! I don't live in Clontarf! I live in Artane!

CHRISTYG · 22-09-2002 4:38pm

While I (sort of) agree with imp, I am especially thinking of programmes that have no connection with war, terrorism, or such issues, that "willy-nilly" mention THAT date (as I will now refer to it!) for no obvious reason other than to give it another mention. Example- I was listening to a business update the other day-and this wasn't airlines, tourism etc, but something that you wouldn't think was connected (I forget what it was!!) but about 30 seconds into that report, the now-ritual mention of THAT date happened. What's the point in doing that?

article6 · 22-09-2002 6:19pm

The point was so that the economists didn't have to admit that they were wrong about Internet companies collapsing. They take what the Internet companies should be blamed for and put the blame on terrorists. Because, how would we live if the economists were wrong about something?

They took a figure of deserved public anger and turned it into a scapegoat. Sadly, this led to a small number of people wrongly denouncing criticism of the terrorists responsible, but also, many saw through the economists' tricks and began to decry capitalism.

I maintain nonetheless; Monitored capitalism is the greatest of all economic systems. This is implicit from its success. It offers consumers a chance to express personal tastes, morals, and opinions when purchasing, something which is impossible under other systems.

Sept. 11 (meant in the least corny way)

Comments