I don't know that "dishonoring" is the right word. But no qualification was needed after the initial thought was expressed.Actually, there's much more that should be said.
Are you offended because you think I'm dishonoring the victims and/or what's probably your blind patriotism?
I remember my classmate who was in the army, scared to death.Today marks the 21st anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
I was 14 at the time and I remember that it was a nice sunny afternoon here in Austria (unlike today, which is fully clouded and rainy).
It was a Tuesday and I was getting ready to pack my school stuff into my backpack, because the next day the 1st day at my new school - the Austrian high school - would start.
I was already pretty nervous because a new school meant new friends and new teachers, but the 9/11 attacks made everything and everyone even more nervous and sad.
I was 21 and watched the coverage in my parents' living room. It was three weeks before I started CR school. Have been reporting for going on 17 years. Thanks for making me remember my ageToday marks the 21st anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
I was 14 at the time and I remember that it was a nice sunny afternoon here in Austria (unlike today, which is fully clouded and rainy).
It was a Tuesday and I was getting ready to pack my school stuff into my backpack, because the next day the 1st day at my new school - the Austrian high school - would start.
I was already pretty nervous because a new school meant new friends and new teachers, but the 9/11 attacks made everything and everyone even more nervous and sad.
I don't know that "dishonoring" is the right word. But no qualification was needed after the initial thought was expressed.
What happened to those innocent people was horrible.
Fin.
That's a perspective which uses their deaths as a prop in a political narrative - insisting that only the fraction of the story which bolsters American nationalism should be told.I don't know that "dishonoring" is the right word. But no qualification was needed after the initial thought was expressed.
What happened to those innocent people was horrible.
Fin.
I was in a government building serving jury duty about 1000 miles from where the attacks took place. We were excused for the day. When we returned the next morning security was very tight.Today marks the 21st anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.
I was 14 at the time and I remember that it was a nice sunny afternoon here in Austria (unlike today, which is fully clouded and rainy).
It was a Tuesday and I was getting ready to pack my school stuff into my backpack, because the next day the 1st day at my new school - the Austrian high school - would start.
I was already pretty nervous because a new school meant new friends and new teachers, but the 9/11 attacks made everything and everyone even more nervous and sad.
BS.What happened to those innocent people was horrible. Unfortunately, the US has been doing horrible things to innocent people for decades, if not centuries.
At first believing the laughable official story that the jet fuel weakened the frame. Then I learned that jet fuel is only kerosene. You can burn it on steel all day and the steel won't even get soft. Then I watched 2000 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth "Explosive Evidence" and saw it was a demolition.
9/11 Smoking Gun: Demolition Explosives, Final Sequence. This is Not the Sound of Floors Collapsing
NIST conducted a thorough study of the WTC collapses. It was pretty obvious that the majority of the structural integrity of the towers was based on their central column. Once that severed by the impact, then it was only a matter of time before the towers collapsed - fire or no.
There was no single central column which was severed. There were 47 cross-braced core columns that were mostly intact.
What about WTC7? Not hit by a plane. Just came straight down.
![]()
9/11 mystery solved: World Trade Center didn't collapse due to fire
ONE of the towers during the 9/11 terror attacks did not collapse due to a fire, a shocking study has claimed.www.express.co.uk
The use of the word "conspiracy" is for the weak-minded who cannot reason for themselves. A government report saying everything is ok is all you need.
Twin Tower core backbone under construction
Illustration of main support columns
![]()
9/11: How it Was Done, the Science of Demolition
By "James Madison" #howtheydid911 NOTE: CLICK RED "YOUTUBE" BUTTON ON VIDEOS IF YOU ARE HAVING TROUBLE VIEWING As public awareness grows...911explained.blogspot.com
At first believing the laughable official story that the jet fuel weakened the frame. Then I learned that jet fuel is only kerosene. You can burn it on steel all day and the steel won't even get soft. Then I watched 2000 Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth "Explosive Evidence" and saw it was a demolition.
9/11 Smoking Gun: Demolition Explosives, Final Sequence. This is Not the Sound of Floors Collapsing
There was no single central column which was severed. There were 47 cross-braced core columns that were mostly intact.
What about WTC7? Not hit by a plane. Just came straight down.
![]()
9/11 mystery solved: World Trade Center didn't collapse due to fire
ONE of the towers during the 9/11 terror attacks did not collapse due to a fire, a shocking study has claimed.www.express.co.uk
The use of the word "conspiracy" is for the weak-minded who cannot reason for themselves. A government report saying everything is ok is all you need.
Twin Tower core backbone under construction
Illustration of main support columns
![]()
9/11: How it Was Done, the Science of Demolition
By "James Madison" #howtheydid911 NOTE: CLICK RED "YOUTUBE" BUTTON ON VIDEOS IF YOU ARE HAVING TROUBLE VIEWING As public awareness grows...911explained.blogspot.com
I am hard-pressed to think of anything I've read on this forum that is more stupid than the assertion that simply stating, without qualification, "what happened to those innocent people was horrible," should be considered to be using them "as a prop in a political narrative" and "[exploiting] their deaths."That's a perspective which uses their deaths as a prop in a political narrative - insisting that only the fraction of the story which bolsters American nationalism should be told.
No-one deserves to die like that, and no-one deserves to have their deaths exploited like that.
No-one said that, obviously. Plenty of people have posted in the thread expressing only their horror at the attack. But only one person decided that it was necessary to jump on someone else for telling a little more of the story - saying that Antiwar "should have stopped there" with only the bit supporting your preferred political narrative. Attacking others for providing some broader context, as you did, is indeed exploiting those deaths for political purposes, same as happened in 2001.I am hard-pressed to think of anything I've read on this forum that is more stupid than the assertion that simply stating, without qualification, "what happened to those innocent people was horrible," should be considered to be using them "as a prop in a political narrative" and "[exploiting] their deaths."
I notice that you've failed miserably to address the fact that tens of thousands of innocent people in Afghanistan died because of the illegal retaliatory invasion, made possible mainly because far too many people followed the "tell only this part of the story" demand which you've made.Such an assertion is just some wildly, galactically stupid shit.
It even mentions "9/11 trutherism" specifically.Jesus, man, give it a break. Conspiracy threads are thataway.
It even mentions "9/11 trutherism" specifically.
"No one said that?" "Obviously?" No, YOU said that. Allow me to refresh your memory:No-one said that, obviously.
But no qualification was needed after the initial thought was expressed.
What happened to those innocent people was horrible.
Obviously, you said that.That's a perspective which uses their deaths as a prop in a political narrative - insisting that only the fraction of the story which bolsters American nationalism should be told.
No-one deserves to die like that, and no-one deserves to have their deaths exploited like that.
Except this isn't a thread asking for "broader context." If your spouse is murdered in the course of a mugging, let's make sure someone gets up at their funeral to give the "broader context" of how the mugger was misunderstood, oppressed, and driven by society to commit this crime.Plenty of people have posted in the thread expressing only their horror at the attack. But only one person decided that it was necessary to jump on someone else for telling a little more of the story - saying that Antiwar "should have stopped there" with only the bit supporting your preferred political narrative. Attacking others for providing some broader context, as you did, is indeed exploiting those deaths for political purposes, same as happened in 2001.
Wanna talk about it? Make a thread for it.I notice that you've failed miserably to address the fact that tens of thousands of innocent people in Afghanistan died
This isn't your own personal safe space, Grizzly. It's unfortunate if your feelings are hurt by all this, but for many people their first thoughts on 9/11 were of shock and horror followed in subsequent minutes, hours or days by the recognition of how very many innocent people in foreign countries have been killed in similar fashion by America, both directly through military action or even moreso indirectly through economic policy. Even if your self-assigned Thread Moderator badge carried any weight, those recognitions obviously do belong in this thread.Except this isn't a thread asking for "broader context." If your spouse is murdered in the course of a mugging, let's make sure someone gets up at their funeral to give the "broader context" of how the mugger was misunderstood, oppressed, and driven by society to commit this crime.
That's pretty much what you and @Antiwar are doing.
Wanna talk about it? Make a thread for it.
This isn't it.