(September 12, 2016 at 4:57 pm)Tiberius Wrote: If they did, I expect it was an attempt to tell people to go on with their lives as normally as possible. The US had been attacked, but if people panicked there might have been more chaos than there was.

Since our tv is full of 9/11 documentaries these days, Giuliani said to stay calm and best stay at home on the day of the attack. Maybe he said something about carry on as usual later on.

(September 12, 2016 at 5:01 pm)abaris Wrote: Since our tv is full of 9/11 documentaries these days, Giuliani said to stay calm and best stay at home on the day of the attack. Maybe he said something about carry on as usual later on.

Yeah I figured he would say that on the day of the attacks. I don't think either him or Bush said anything about Disneyland or shopping while the attack was being performed, but I can see a comment like that a few days after (even the day after) being used to try and calm people.

Edit: Apparently Bush's comment several days after was "Get down to Disney World in Florida. Take your families and enjoy life, the way we want it to be enjoyed." which to me suggests that yes, it was supposed to be a calming comment, that while America had just been attacked, it wasn't the end of the world, and people should act as normally as they could.

(September 12, 2016 at 5:04 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Edit: Apparently Bush's comment several days after was "Get down to Disney World in Florida. Take your families and enjoy life, the way we want it to be enjoyed." which to me suggests that yes, it was supposed to be a calming comment, that while America had just been attacked, it wasn't the end of the world, and people should act as normally as they could.

Well, in my parts, and given that nobody put much trust into Bush's faculties even then, we fully expected or at least considered it a possibility that he would nuke Afghanistan. It came as a pleasant surprise that only conventional missiles were fired only days after the attack.

SO MUCH EDGE

(September 12, 2016 at 5:04 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(September 12, 2016 at 5:01 pm)abaris Wrote: Since our tv is full of 9/11 documentaries these days, Giuliani said to stay calm and best stay at home on the day of the attack. Maybe he said something about carry on as usual later on.

Yeah I figured he would say that on the day of the attacks. I don't think either him or Bush said anything about Disneyland or shopping while the attack was being performed, but I can see a comment like that a few days after (even the day after) being used to try and calm people.

Edit: Apparently Bush's comment several days after was "Get down to Disney World in Florida. Take your families and enjoy life, the way we want it to be enjoyed." which to me suggests that yes, it was supposed to be a calming comment, that while America had just been attacked, it wasn't the end of the world, and people should act as normally as they could.

So lets just continue our blissful and exploitive commercialism? Not like that has anything to do with other peoples in the world wanting to harm us...

Oh look! They even build a shopping mall at ground zero for our purchasing convenience!

Westfield World Trade Center is a shopping center at the World Trade Center complex which is operated and managed by Westfield Corporation. The mall opened on August 16, 2016.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westfield_...ade_Center

---

God forbid we let these insane terrorists get in the way of our pursuit of happiness...

That's just plain un-American!

(September 12, 2016 at 5:28 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: So lets just continue our blissful and exploitive commercialism? Not like that has anything to do with other peoples in the world wanting to harm us...

As much as I despised the Bush administration that's just an appeal to carry on as normal. I really don't see anything wrong with that.

But there have been Orwellian moments. The day of the attack or on the day after, Bush gave a speech on ground zero talking about "the folks who did it" will hear from all of us. Our tv even pointed the sloppy term of "folks" out in the simultaneous translation. In later rehashes of the same scene "folks" had been replaced by "guys". I never heard the original again. Maybe someone managed to capture it, but I've yet to see it again.

(September 12, 2016 at 5:47 pm)abaris Wrote:

(September 12, 2016 at 5:28 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: So lets just continue our blissful and exploitive commercialism? Not like that has anything to do with other peoples in the world wanting to harm us...

As much as I despised the Bush administration that's just an appeal to carry on as normal. I really don't see anything wrong with that.

But there have been Orwellian moments. The day of the attack or on the day after, Bush gave a speech on ground zero talking about "the folks who did it" will hear from all of us. Our tv even pointed the sloppy term of "folks" out in the simultaneous translation. In later rehashes of the same scene "folks" had been replaced by "guys". I never heard the original again. Maybe someone managed to capture it, but I've yet to see it again.

And that's part of the problem.


I don't really see much a difference between "folks" and "guys" beside a possible backward reference to German people. Why does it stick out for you?

(September 12, 2016 at 4:54 pm)abaris Wrote:

(September 12, 2016 at 4:26 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: But they were there by choice. They joined their services voluntarily.

I certainly appreciate your input, since you were in the emergency services too. I was a medic and ambulance driver for four years, as I said repeatedly. I don't know what they told you when joining up, but what the hammered into our heads when being schooled was always self protection comes before protecting others. If a situation is deemed to dangerous to handle, get yourself to safety.

So, according to this lesson, since I don't think they teach a different approach in the US, I consider them heroes. They stayed on to save lives. I never been in that kind of situation and don't know if I had the guts, but simply joining the services doesn't buy what they were in for.

Yeah, my post was poorly-worded, being prefaced with "but". I was only disagreeing with their status as volunteers; you'd said they were not "heroes by choice", but given the latitude you and I were both apparently given to make an on-the-scene judgement, and assuming they had the same latitude, I'd say they were there by choice, and indeed that choice demonstrates their valor and is what makes them heroes.

Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it seems to me we're in agreement, except for this one small point.

(September 12, 2016 at 5:52 pm)Arkilogue Wrote: Why does it stick out for you?

Well. our language is German. That's also the narrative our tv went along with and my understanding of the terms also. Folks seems to be the friendler term if you talk about attackers. Much like a cordial reference to a merry bunch of pub dwellers, whereas guys is rather neutral. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the finer distinctions between the words, but that's how I understood it at that time and was rather flabbergasted by Bush using the word.

(September 12, 2016 at 5:55 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it seems to me we're in agreement, except for this one small point.

I think so. My point is that even in joining the emergency services you're not in for putting your life on the line for the sake of others. At least where I got my training it was rather discouraged to do that. In order to not turn you into a dead hero, and in order to preserve you and your experience to help others.

So, yes, I think by going up the blazing towers, they were heroes. They lost their lives not only in the line of duty but outside of that line. I don't know about your training, but in our corner of the world the usual approach would be to bring the fire under control and then enter to see who could be saved.

And let me add that the term hero is something I rarely use. Only reserved for people who try to save others.