Viewing Thread:
"9/11"

Saw this brough up in another thread. Out of respect for that thread (if you know which one you'll understand) I've put the topic here instead.

What troubles me about 9/11 is that if it had happened to some financial building in Africa. The coverage wouldn't have been anything like it was.
i have summed it up to people before and they have agreed that it been considered an even worse crime because:

A bunch of rich, white Americans died.


They are somehow more important than other people in the world.
This sickens me and lessens my sympathy for America.

Obviously I'm generalising but I think my point is clear.

Hedfix wrote:
> Because they were American lives they are somehow worth more attention
> than people starving in Africa.

*nods in agreement*

although starving in africa is not really the same as an act of terrorism

I haven't read every post in this topic by the way, so forgive me if this has been said.

Although the number of lives lost was a huge amount, the main fear that was sparked was the global devestation that it caused, and how easily hijacking a plane was shown to be. It cuased mass chaos in the aerial transport world as well as many fears of terrorist plots to destroy large areas such as London.

Not connected as so, but, I can see where Hedfix is coming from in a way, although I don't stropngly agree with him, on this particular comment, one that I was disgusted with was the Colombia Shuttle disaster, I diidn't mind it being in the news for a week, 2 at the most, but it was everywhere, and lasted for ages, even though it was the death of 7 people. In the amount of time that they spent covering the disaster, 10's of thousands of people would have died in third world countries, but, I'm blabbering now, so, I'll leave you all in peace.

Because they were American lives they are somehow worth more attention than people starving in Africa.

lalakersrule wrote:
> The craziest Col! wrote:
> I meant, it ws only 3000 + , but think about it, it mauy sound a lot
> but it really isn't.
>
>
> Only 3000 innocent lives lost, only 3000 families that have lost their
> loved ones and had their whole world turned upside down. How you can
> even come out with such a thing to say beggars belief.

I think on this one Col meant that in the 'grand scheme of things'. It isn't that many people. Pol Pot killed a lot more people and he only got put under house arrest.

I repeat my below statement:

I hate it how everyone calls it 9/11. Have we all suddenly changed American? We're British - we write the date as 11/9, fools. I always call it 11/9, and I get some bloody odd looks :D

It's almost as bad as singers singing with an American accent *cough* Busted, Robbie Williams etc *cough*

> i think the holocaust dwarfs any act like the 9/11 attack or the nuke
> bombing, as the 6 million jews and other religious people were all
> executed in the worst way - from the inside.

I disagree. I believe that both are tragic and so utterly different that they cannot be compared.

Each has to be viewed not by the number of people who died but on the individuals who died and the individuals in both events died for equally needless reasons.

Cyclone wrote:
> *Holocaust

i think the holocaust dwarfs any act like the 9/11 attack or the nuke bombing, as the 6 million jews and other religious people were all executed in the worst way - from the inside.

Skorp1on wrote:
> One death is a tragidy, a million deaths is a statistic.
>
> Joseph Stalin

that man wasn't full of crap after all, then. wise words.

I hate it how everyone calls it 9/11. Have we all suddenly changed American? We're British - we write the date as 11/9, fools. I always call it 11/9, and I get some bloody odd looks :D

It's almost as bad as singers singing with an American accent *cough* Busted, Robbie Williams etc *cough*

One death is a tragidy, a million deaths is a statistic.

Joseph Stalin