Our New Pearl Harbor

Weehauken, N.J. -- It's almost impossible to reconcile the cool, clear, cloudless day with the scene across the water. There are no World Trade Centers, and up above the giant white clouds steaming from the spot where they used to be, pairs of F-15's circle over Manhattan, around and around the encircled island. Along the closed entrances and highways into the city, ambulances, fire engines and police cars line up for miles waiting to take the thousands of casualties out of New York City and all over the Northeast. At the blood bank in Paramus where I tried to give blood, there were five-hour lines, and the police turned us away.Reporters break down on the air and sob. At the closed-down bridges and tunnels, people stand alongside their cars by the score, staring and crying. I keep calling the cell of one of my closest friends, who went to work inside the Towers at 8:30, and kept getting his voice-mail, until 11:00 a.m., when a recording said his phone was no longer in service. All around New York City, psychologists are showing up at school bus stops to deal with kids whose parents aren't coming home. It's impossible to stare at the TV and not think of the horrific convergence between technology, politics, and information.

Eerily, the scene invokes disaster movies -- a number of which have actually shown the World Trade Center towers being blown up. Staring across the harbor on this gorgeous day, it takes a few seconds to realize that this isn't the evocation of something new and horrible, but the real thing, our own Pearl Harbor, perhaps even worse, since it struck us closer to home and reminded us all how technology can bring us all nose-to-nose with war in seconds, and there are no real barriers between people willing to use it in evil ways and us. Technology allows us to see the building collapse before the reporters even know what has happened. We have to try and make sense of it ourselves.

The silence is stunning, unprecedented for mid-morning, mid-week anywhere near Manhattan island. Everyone is in shock. Stories, malls, business are closing, their workers crying, distracted, unsure of how to behave.

Technology turns planes into weapons. It tracks aircraft hundreds of miles away. It brings us instant and horrific images. It sends us to e-mail, telephones and cell phones to spread news, facts, rumors and stories.

We are both shocked and oddly prepared. Sci-fi and other forms of popular culture have been preparing us for this kind of Techno-Armageddon for years. Technology can do all sorts of amazing things, but it can't protect us from a handful of determined people. We've never seen anything like it, yet in a strange way we have thought of it for years.

Standing over the harbor, I did something I haven't done in 20 years. I dropped to my knees -- following the lead of a bunch of strangers -- and prayed. I have a bunch of friends in somewhere in that Techno-Armageddon, and just wanted to post these thoughts. If anybody wants to post their own, hopefully here's a good place.

What repercussions

In the wake of this tragedy, I think we need to examine the repercussions.

As for the US's retaliation, I think it should be swift and decisive. I think there should be a battery of cruise missles launched at every known, suspected or rumored terrorist hangout, EVERYWHERE in the world. There are arguments to this that we should wait until we are sure who it is, that we should not retaliate at all because this will just perpetuate the hostilities.

This is bull-shit. When colombian drug dealers killed DEA agent, Kiki Camarena, the DEA broke down every suspected drug dealer's door with or without evidence of any crimes. The DEA fucked them up really good. Since that time, DEA agents have led charmed lives. In many cases DEA agents are in peril, but only live because the Druggies know better than to touch a DEA agent for the repercussions. In the same light, it is clear to me and should be to everyone else that a serious strike against ALL possible/suspected terrorist organizations will send a similar message.

I think we should consider the movie "The Siege" with Denzel Washington. In the movie, following three or four terrorist attacks the city of New York was brought to a standstill. They declared Marshall Law. This was the effect on one city. In real life, with todays terrorist attacks, most state universities were shut down, many, many businesses all over the nation are closed. Lots of people will begin to live in fear.

This is, of course, what the terrorists want. When we begin to live in fear, we have betrayed the principles of our very country. We must strike back at these and all terrorists. We must send a message to this sick and twisted community that the US will not stand for this.

Beyond whatever reprisals the President decides to launch. I think we will begin to see some other serious repercussions. Do you think air travel will be the same? I thought it was very strict as it was. We may have to submit to cavity searches before too long.

Here's an interesting issue and one that is well to debate on Slashdot. It is said on just about all the major news networks that there has been an intelligence breakdown. That the terrorists use sophisticated encryption measures and that our intelligence agencies are under-funded and don't have the ability to keep tabs on the terrorists. Question: would you be willing to trade your personal privacy for maybe some further measure of security from terrorists? Would you grant the people running Carnivore greater rights into your life in order to perhaps prevent more events like this? Is the encryption export ban such a bad thing when stacked against 50,000 people's lives?

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

I don't know if we should put up with a greater intelligence presence. I know that is what we will experience. That is pretty clear. But what is obvious to me is that we must rise above this, we must not live in fear, and we must make these sons-of-bitches PAY for what they've done to assure that they can never do it again.

Well, US intelligence is enamored of high tech

and not as interested in low tech, face to face survelliance. Somewhat like a certain web page, the US intelligence community believes there is a high tech solution to every problem.

When your biggest enemy is Russia, almost as technically advanced as you, this may make sense.

When your biggest enemy is a terrorist living in the mountains of Asia, and plotting an attach face to face over Coleman lantern light, the best spy satellites in the world won't help you, you need someone on site.

Iran was overthrown becuase we had no agents in the Ayatollah's movement, and this may be a similar situation.

Re:What repercussions

The american people will cry out for revenge, but you should calm down before striking whoever responsible. Revenging - you must remember - is hard. Traditionally, revenge leads to someone revenging the revenge, unless the revenge is targeted with high political and practical accuracy. Remember, a missil can't tell Bush from e.g. BinLaden. In addition the pressision is not high enough to avoid hitting civilians. If civilians is hit the governmet controlled media in the target country can:

1. condemn the action agains WTC and the Pentagon, thus condemning the attack on their country.
2. using their government controlled media to make the people - even those personally neutral to the US - condemn the US, thus making new terrorist killing more people.

I would like to urge the American people to look for other solutions, silent actions. For instance they can through heavy intelligence - which will be conducted - locate and arrest the people responsible. A trial and conviction would be a much more satisfying and peaceful solution.

Two bonuses will also be given by doing it this way:
1. you are sertain the people responsible are caught, not just presumingly dead.
2. the country housing the terrorist would be put in an - for them - unbeneficial position giving the western countries a good way to excess political pressure on them with a small, but larger than normal effect.

People of america: let the your government know what you belive is right!!

(This is a repost from a previous discussion, but it was to important.)

Re:Good idea, but this is not Utopia

The idea of no retalitation and just allowing for peace is definetly the utopian solution.

I'm not going to call for no retaliation. I am, however going to call for no random retaliation. Retaliation against civilian targets only vaguely associated with (the) terrorists will simply create more people, more desparate and more angry. It plays into the hands of the terrorist by creating even more people who are angry and/or desperate enough to work on suicide or other terrorist attacks.

Consider, for a moment, the kind of desperation it would take for someone to be a suicide attacker. Even in extreme situations, it is the rare person who would do something like this. It requires the willful creation of a desperate situation within a large population over a period of time.

Someone touched on this in an earlier post. What Israel has been doing to the Palestinian people in response to the Intifada has created a breeding ground for terrorists -- especially suicidal terrorists.

Retaliation should be strong and as swift as possible -- but against terrorists only. We are now experiencing, firsthand, the result of anger being directed against innocent civilian targets. If we take on the tactics of our attackers all we will do is feed the cycle of violence and hatred -- leading only to more death and destruction.

Break the circle. Stop violence against (innocent) civilians.

Careful about targeting one source...

This was our main subject in Psych class today at college, and our professor was especially worried about it.

Our professor is an Egyptian and an active Muslim. She was especially worried because everyone here in America associates BinLaden with the Islamic faith. It's as far from the truth as possible. BinLaden calls himself a "Fundamentalist Muslim," but has been denounced by Muslims throughout the world. She made us understand (and everyone should understand this before they point fingers) is that Palestineans / Arabs / Egyptians / whatever race or religion of people in the Middle East does not support the terrorist view of "If you kill Americans, you get into the life beyond." She was praying that the people behind the attack wern't Muslims, because the traditional Muslim faiths don't condone killing others. Unfortunately for her and us, though, our only image of the Muslim faith is BinLaden carrying out his attacks in the name of religion. It puts such a heavy burden on her here in the United States, since no one understands the fundamentals of the Muslim faith.

We should not go out on a witch hunt, because we are not sure yet who did it. But even more, people need to understand that these are INDIVIDUALS. They are INDIVIDUAL ACTS. They DO NOT represent any race of people, any religion of people, or any country of people.

I just hope people can find a way to understand.

OK...

So, basically you think we should fight fire with fire. We should become terrorists ourselves in order to punish those who committed this act. In the end, we will end up locked in a battle to the death with the terrorists responsible for today's attacks, and probably others as well. We will have no moral justification for our acts other than the same justifications that the terrorists of the world normally give. This was not the first stone to be thrown. This is just a bigger stone than usual. Most Americans don't even know what the hell our country does overseas or how our actions affect the people of other countries. Most people don't seem to really care. Is it any surprise that we've made enemies such as this?

Re:What repercussions

Sorry bud, but all a paroxym of destruction will bring is more of the same. If decisive but massive killing actually stopped the other side, Israel would be as peaceful as Omaha by now.

Re:What repercussions

Ah, the "genocide is the answer" solution

When someone else has sworn to kill you, sitting around and trying to be nice is stupid. Kill them first. Or are you not paying attention to what those vermin are preaching in their newspapers, television programs, and mosques? Imagine a TV show for children which told kids how sweet the blood of the infidels smells. Or, if you'd like, move to the West Bank and watch it yourself.

They started the fight. It's time to end it.

-jon

Re:What repercussions

Of course repercussions are necessary. The question is what do we do? Do you think sending missiles to suspected rouge nations is a good idea? You claim that you need to protect democracy and the American way of life. Well, in your example you site the DEA. They were not democratic. Would you stand by your convictions if you were the one being imprisioned or worse yet killed based on suspecions? This reminds me of China or the Spanish Inquisition or any number of other undemocratic acts.

So, what should be done? There are black boxes on those planes, if they survived. There must be intelligence reports from the CIA and other national security agencies. Two weeks or more to piece together what exactly happened, who was responsible and how they were able to do this without triggers being tripped everywhere. Then suitable punishment - if it's an act of war, then it must be. This is how America got involved with WW2 is it not.

But to suggest that we just blindly give up our democratic freedom is to give these terrorists precisely what they want. I for one am not willing to do that. I'm all for deadly repercussions, but they need to be well thought out and well executed.

Re:What repercussions

When colombian drug dealers killed DEA agent, Kiki Camarena, the DEA broke down every suspected drug dealer's door with or without evidence of any crimes. The DEA fucked them up really good.

...I think we should consider the movie "The Siege" with Denzel Washington. In the movie, following three or four terrorist attacks the city of New York was brought to a standstill. They declared Marshall Law. This was the effect on one city.

You must not have seen the rest of the movie [spoiler alert] - the whole point of it was that if you kick in doors everywhere, if you give up on the rule of law just because some degenerates refuse to live within it, if you allow some nut cases to goad you into creating the very environment of reprisal that they thrive on, you've given your enemy exactly what they want. The moral of The Siege was that even in times of crisis, tarring the innocent with the same brush as the guilty is the wrong thing to do, no matter how inspired towards ass-kicking we may be right now. Of course you leave potential terrorists living in fear, but at the expense of leaving everyone living in fear as well. In the long run, a civil society cannot continue along that path.

I think the jury's still out on the intelligence angle, although the three-letter-agencies will have you believe otherwise. For all we know, what was lacking to prevent this tragedy was not Carnivore interdiction, but just a little more attention on the part of an airline gate agent in Boston or Newark. I would think that any terrorists capable of planning this action would be smart enough to not use any public or semi-public communications medium which might have a chance of being tapped. Don't believe anything you hear on this topic for the next couple of weeks, until we can really begin to get to the bottom of it.

Yes, we need to change some things and prevent the reoccurrence of this kind of attack. But equally importantly we need to not allow terrorism to transform society into a warped vision of the very groups that hate us, just because of our fear and uncertainty. Democracy can triumph over terror, if only its own citizens give it the chance.

Re:You think this is war? I'LL show you War!

You may not have experienced war since WW II, but certainly a number of other countries have experienced war, either directly with U.S. troops or with U.S.-trained and -funded troops. A partial list:

• Korea
• Vietnam
• Cambodia
• Hell, most of Southeast Asia
• Nicaragua
• El Salvador
• Chile
• Hell, most of Latin America
• Iraq
• Palestine
• Iran
• Lebanon
• Hell, most of the Middle East

Well, at least most of Africa and Europe have remained free of the grip of American soldiery.

This is why the terrorists engage in these kinds of activities. They do not feel they have anything to lose. Sadly, they may be right: the United States' grasp of realpolitik is incredibly weak.

Re:What repercussions

I am gonna post something that is gonna be very unpopulair i am sure, but still i am puzzled.

You state in your email your shock at the loss of life, and the loss of freedom.

Yet your way to solve this is to take more human lives (launch missles at every one suspected), and take away the freedom of everyone suspected.

In no way can i rime these two arguments. Yes this is the worst thing i have seen on CNN ..ever? (i am not up close, i admit). However wasnt it the american founding fathers who said that freedom goes above all differences? This also means respecting the freedom of others.

I accept that you feel the guilty need to be delt with, however shooting the world @ random won't make the situation any better. You would betray the very thing you fight for. Justice and Freedom.

Also, don't forget before you claim the world will not be the same, that palastinians, people in ireland, south afrika, etc have suffered the same faith. Next time they are in the news, think back of this moment. This might be a unique opertunity to cherish freedom, not only for americans, but for humans.

rebuilding the towers...

After a discussion with some co-workers, we agreed that the towers should be re-built, and in the some location as the former towers. Not only as a memorial to those who died, but also as a sign of this country's strength.

Any other thoughts on this matter? Should the towers be rebuilt?

Re:rebuilding the towers...

Personally, I'd like to see three towers built in their place, with the middle one much taller than the other two. That way, it would look like a giant middle finger, directed straight at the fuckers who did this.

Re:rebuilding the towers...

Just some sobering thoughts for a sobering situation.

These days office space is in a glut. Who is going to fill those enormous towers (esp. given the state of our current economy, which isn't going to be improving any time soon in light of today's events)?

More to the point, who is going to *want* to work in those buildings after what happened today?

I agree that it's not necessarily a bad idea, especially as a way of bringing the country together, but these are one of a few realities that such a project would have to face.

As a sidenote, shouldn't there be a way for the ground control to override the controls of a hijacked plane?