NYC community board OKs ground zero mosque plans

[Kevin]

What the hell is it about 9/11 victims which makes them any better than victims of any other tragedy? They've had nine years and have pretty much all received pretty serious cash settlements which victims of other tragedies didn't get. I don't really understand this unthinking, unquestioning reverence towards these people.

We had the bombing in OKC in 1995. In 2004, victims of that tragedy still have their annual memorial ceremony--some dignitaries give speeches, Clinton makes an occasional appearance, someone semi-famous sings Amazing Grace, the end.

These 9/11 victims apparently believe certain religious groups should but $100MM+ projects on hold (or cancel them altogether) because to go on would not be 'compassionate.' For the lack of a better word, bullshit.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by Kevin

What the hell is it about 9/11 victims which makes them any better than victims of any other tragedy? They've had nine years and have pretty much all received pretty serious cash settlements which victims of other tragedies didn't get. I don't really understand this unthinking, unquestioning reverence towards these people.

We had the bombing in OKC in 1995. In 2004, victims of that tragedy still have their annual memorial ceremony--some dignitaries give speeches, Clinton makes an occasional appearance, someone semi-famous sings Amazing Grace, the end.

These 9/11 victims apparently believe certain religious groups should but $100MM+ projects on hold (or cancel them altogether) because to go on would not be 'compassionate.' For the lack of a better word, bullshit.

However insensitive this may come off, I have to agree with you.

[Animate]

Originally Posted by Kevin

What the hell is it about 9/11 victims which makes them any better than victims of any other tragedy? They've had nine years and have pretty much all received pretty serious cash settlements which victims of other tragedies didn't get. I don't really understand this unthinking, unquestioning reverence towards these people.

We had the bombing in OKC in 1995. In 2004, victims of that tragedy still have their annual memorial ceremony--some dignitaries give speeches, Clinton makes an occasional appearance, someone semi-famous sings Amazing Grace, the end.

These 9/11 victims apparently believe certain religious groups should but $100MM+ projects on hold (or cancel them altogether) because to go on would not be 'compassionate.' For the lack of a better word, bullshit.

FTW!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Kevin

What the hell is it about 9/11 victims which makes them any better than victims of any other tragedy? They've had nine years and have pretty much all received pretty serious cash settlements which victims of other tragedies didn't get. I don't really understand this unthinking, unquestioning reverence towards these people.

We had the bombing in OKC in 1995. In 2004, victims of that tragedy still have their annual memorial ceremony--some dignitaries give speeches, Clinton makes an occasional appearance, someone semi-famous sings Amazing Grace, the end.

These 9/11 victims apparently believe certain religious groups should but $100MM+ projects on hold (or cancel them altogether) because to go on would not be 'compassionate.' For the lack of a better word, bullshit.

What the hell is it?

Bombing 2 extremely well known buildings that everyone in the US can identify, and trying for a 3rd. I mean if a random person would watch a movie filmed in OKC in 1989, they probably wouldn't know which building it was that was bombed. If that same random watched a movie filmed in NYC and DC in 1999, they could easily pick out the WTC and the Pentagon and feel sad when they looked at them.

I absolutely agree with the rest of your post, but you asked why - simplistic as it is, I think that might be a big part of it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

What the hell is it?

Bombing 2 extremely well known buildings that everyone in the US can identify, and trying for a 3rd. I mean if a random person would watch a movie filmed in OKC in 1989, they probably wouldn't know which building it was that was bombed.

Probably not even then. The Memorial that sits there now is much more memorable than the building which existed before it. As an aside, the new federal building looks more like a bomb shelter than an office building. Ugly as sin...

If that same random watched a movie filmed in NYC and DC in 1999, they could easily pick out the WTC and the Pentagon and feel sad when they looked at them.

I get it what you're saying. 9/11 victims are much more recognizable, hence easier to utilize for political gain. That doesn't make it right.

I absolutely agree with the rest of your post, but you asked why - simplistic as it is, I think that might be a big part of it.

You're right of course.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by 33girl

What the hell is it?

Bombing 2 extremely well known buildings that everyone in the US can identify, and trying for a 3rd. I mean if a random person would watch a movie filmed in OKC in 1989, they probably wouldn't know which building it was that was bombed. If that same random watched a movie filmed in NYC and DC in 1999, they could easily pick out the WTC and the Pentagon and feel sad when they looked at them.

I absolutely agree with the rest of your post, but you asked why - simplistic as it is, I think that might be a big part of it.

Consider that larger numbers of victims leaves behind much larger numbers of relatives/loved ones to advocate for them as well. There's also the surreal "live" playout of 9/11 that is still seared in peoples conscious, as well as the fact that most americans probably feel 9/11 was a "bigger deal" than the OK bombing.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

Consider that larger numbers of victims leaves behind much larger numbers of relatives/loved ones to advocate for them as well.

Does the larger number justify the increase the larger news/media presence?

There's also the surreal "live" playout of 9/11 that is still seared in peoples conscious,

This is a VERY good point . . .

as well as the fact that most americans probably feel 9/11 was a "bigger deal" than the OK bombing.

. . .while this basically says "RACISM".

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

. . .while this basically says "RACISM".

How do you figure? If the sole reason of thinking that 9/11 was worse than the Murrah bombing is because arabs did it, then yes.... but who really thinks like that? I'm in no way trying to diminish the tragedy in Oklahoma but it's doesn't quite stack up to the level of death and destruction we saw on 9/11 or even the aftermath. 9/11 changed this country on so many different levels. How many wars were started because of Oklahoma City?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

How do you figure? If the sole reason of thinking that 9/11 was worse than the Murrah bombing is because arabs did it, then yes.... but who really thinks like that? I'm in no way trying to diminish the tragedy in Oklahoma but it's doesn't quite stack up to the level of death and destruction we saw on 9/11 or even the aftermath. 9/11 changed this country on so many different levels. How many wars were started because of Oklahoma City?

Well, one possibility is, when the bombings first occured, the FBI did think it was possibly the same terrorists that bombed the WTC a few years before that happened. But the big part had to do with the fact that McVeigh was arrested almost 2hrs after the bombing and once the Feds were sure it was him..well. War averted until 9/11.

Also I think that the act itself, how it was carried out and the lack of safety measures we had at that point, regardless of how many who died was also what changed America.

Remember this, what's always been said is because of the time of day it happened, just think of how many more could have been killed had this been carried out later on in the day.

[Nanners52674]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

How do you figure? If the sole reason of thinking that 9/11 was worse than the Murrah bombing is because arabs did it, then yes.... but who really thinks like that? I'm in no way trying to diminish the tragedy in Oklahoma but it's doesn't quite stack up to the level of death and destruction we saw on 9/11 or even the aftermath. 9/11 changed this country on so many different levels. How many wars were started because of Oklahoma City?

Why do you need to compare the two tragedies? They are both horrible events in the history of our country and can stand on their own.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by Nanners52674

Why do you need to compare the two tragedies? They are both horrible events in the history of our country and can stand on their own.

I don't NEED to compare anything and I wasn't the one who even brought up OK in the first place

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

How many wars were started because of Oklahoma City?

We captured the guys involved and killed one of them. The two incidents are vastly incomparable.

What were we going to do, bomb Waco for good measure or something?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

What were we going to do, bomb Waco for good measure or something?

Wait, we had already done that.

Just to play Devil's advocate for PiKa, I would think that the comparisons made is due to how much change Americans went through after 9/11 and how much we all had been inudated with the face of Islam in some ways being associated (incorrectly) with terrorism.

the OK city bombings didn't change much except maybe how much more information that a car rental place needed to have on file, but 9/11 drastically changed so much more.

I think that is the point he was trying to make.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by PiKA2001

How do you figure? If the sole reason of thinking that 9/11 was worse than the Murrah bombing is because arabs did it, then yes.... but who really thinks like that? I'm in no way trying to diminish the tragedy in Oklahoma but it's doesn't quite stack up to the level of death and destruction we saw on 9/11 or even the aftermath. 9/11 changed this country on so many different levels.

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.

[DaemonSeid]

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!!!