Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
I don't disagree with parts of this, but remember that there was (and still is) a large amount of "us versus them" involved in 9/11 - OKC wasn't done by "outsiders" while 9/11 was. OKC isn't viewed as an attack on our government (even though it was, both literally and figuratively), while 9/11 often is.
While "racism" isn't exactly the right word, there's no doubt that part of the reason why 9/11 carries so much weight (and the dreaded "TERRORISM" label, while OKC doesn't to the same extent at all) is because it was performed by Muslims. While correlation doesn't equal causation, of course, it's clear that there is prejudice involved.
The "changes" caused by 9/11 were knee-jerk and likely cosmetic - and often for the negative when not cosmetic. I mean, airline travel changes are pretty fine, but the Patriot Act? Really? Those kinds of changes aren't persuasive for me.
|
Interestingly enough, while both of you bring up great points, look at some of the last few events and let's remember who were the primary suspects:
OKC was initally thought to be Muslim terrorists (again until McVeigh was caught)
The Beltway Sniper was originally thought to be an Al - Quaeda agent (oddly enough John Muhammed was an NOI Muslim but some people wouldn't care all the need to see is that he was "Muslim")
The anthrax attacks (RIGHT after 9/11) was thought to be by Al-Quaeda
heck...people were still trying to figure out if Maj. Nidal Hassan had Al-Queada ties after the Ft Hood shootings.
@Ksig...and don't forget the fun part of the Patriot Act...wiretapping!!!
Threaded Mode
