Bozell Column: Opposing 9/11 Remembrance

Photo of Brent Bozell.

As America headed into the weekend before the sixth anniversary of the horrific September 11 terrorist attacks, the latest purported video from Osama bin Laden reminded the country that the war on terrorism is still a real and persistent battle. But some people despise the whole war-on-terror concept. They believe that commemorating 9-11 is getting tired and dated and even psychologically harmful to the country.

As hard (or as easy) as it may be to believe, The New York Times, situated just miles from Ground Zero in Manhattan, published a typically portentous Sunday article asking: "As 9/11 Draws Near, a Debate Rises: How Much Tribute Is Enough?" Times reporter N.R. Kleinfeld suggested the whole rigamarole was tedious, and perhaps distasteful: "Again there will be the public tributes, the tightly scripted memorial events, the reflex news coverage, the souvenir peddlers. Is all of it necessary, at the same decibel level -- still?" Amassing the usual anonymous mass of radicals who are allergic to expressions of national unity or love of country, Kleinfeld insisted "many people feel that the collective commemorations, publicly staged, are excessive and vacant, even annoying."

"Excessive and vacant, even annoying." Come to think of it, that's a pretty good motto for the masthead of The New York Times.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

To be sure, Kleinfeld's article includes both points of view. Nancy Nee, who lost a brother, said ''Six years feels like the blink of an eye. That number means nothing to me.'' But to the hometown paper, that opinion has no more moral authority than the jerk who stated, "I have the sense that some people are living on their victimhood, which I find a little tiring.'' The Times account also featured the typical leftist asserting that 9/11 commemorations are politicized, ''crassly corporatized and co-opted by false patriots.''

This is the same newspaper that found no one could question or contradict the grieving liberal 9/11 widows who campaigned for John Kerry in 2004.

Kleinfeld looked in his crystal ball and suggested 9/11 will soon be forgotten. He asked if anyone still remembers February 15 as the day of the sinking of the battleship Maine in 1898? The article concluded with a professor asking if anyone in New York still commemorates firing on Fort Sumter to begin the Civil War.

There's a huge difference between remembering 2001, and remembering 1861. This is wishful thinking, nothing more.

The "news judgment" that's on display here is obvious. Can anyone imagine the Times suggesting to readers that they stop commemorating Pearl Harbor in 1947? Or to stop remembering John F. Kennedy in 1969, or Martin Luther King in 1974? Would anyone at the Times be willing to condemn these anniversaries when they are "crassly corporatized"?

It's very odd that Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr offered apologies to America's youth in a 2006 graduation speech that this country is so backward that it's still debating over the obvious delights of legalized abortions or "gay marriage" or untrammeled immigration, but Sulzberger's staff thinks the country desperately needs a debate over when to stop remembering September 11.

Where the Times really betrays it's pro-forgetfulness bias is when the academic experts arrive to say that too much remembrance suggests....mental illness. "Mental health practitioners see a certain value in the growing fatigue," we're told. Charles Figley, director of Florida State University's Traumatology Institute, claimed ''It's a good sign when people don't need an anniversary commemoration or demarcation...And it's not disrespectful to those who died.''

National Public Radio picked up the New York Times ball and ran with it. On the afternoon chat show "Talk of the Nation," guest host John Donvan interviewed Dr. Figley, and compared 9/11 events under the Bush administration to his time covering the Soviet Union for ABC. He said the Soviets were aggressive about commemorating World War II, but "I had a distinct sense that there was a political purpose to that in the former Soviet Union. It was to galvanize and legitimize the Soviet government's role because they beat back the Nazis. And again, I think this keeps coming back to your point that people will make use of anniversaries for political purposes as well as personal, psychological purposes."

America can certainly have a debate over how to commemorate 9/11, as we can see from some of the questionable monuments that bureaucrats have tried to create in remembrance of the lost. But just as liberals would insist it's political to pin your campaign on a "war on terror," it's also obviously political – and much more callous – to insist that the war on terror is a yellowed page, and it's time for Americans, citizens and mourners alike, to call off the 9/11 events and pursue more constructive activities, like sticking our heads in the sand.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

it can never be forgotten

It has been six years, and I still remember that day like it was yesterday. Where I was, what I was doing. Standing outstide that night watching the busloads of nurses and other emergency personnel making their way towards the Goethals Bridge heading into the city to do whatever they can.

 That night traffic was backed up getting into Staten Island. It was a beautiful night and I still didn't fully grasp what happened until some time later.

Even now the tears threaten to fall as I remember the horror.

 

 

It should be a National Day of Rembrance

I was just thinking today that it just seems wrong to treat today like any other day. My home is near Shanksville, so if I was home I'd be there, but I'm in Korea. I was going to watch "World Trade Center" but realized I'd lent it to a friend. So what is there to do?

We have no rituals for this day. When I was a kid, we always had a Memorial Day parade to the cemetery, with a ceremony including one girl reciting "In Flanders Field" and a boy reciting the Gettysburg Address. And I was thinking that we need something like that now. I'm just not sure what.

Tedius

Know what's really tedius? Day after day of NYT editorials. The whole rigamarole is tedious, and perhaps distasteful: Again there will be  tightly scripted and repetitious proclamations of defeat, the reflex "I hate George Bush" rantings, the peddlers of Democratic talking points. Is all of it necessary, at the same decibel level -- still? Many people feel that the collective mindset of the NYT editorial staff, honed by their constant focus on how bad America is, isexcessive and vacant, even annoying."

___________________________________ 

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber

Thisnthat, well

Thisnthat,

well put!!!

These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc.
Ronald Reagan- 40th Anniversary of D-Day

To paraphrase Oscar

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde

"A New York Times editorial writer is a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

National day of

National day of anger...

For me, this anniversary has always been a day where I relive the absolute anger I felt that tragic day. In my rage I sometimes wish we would bomb every Muslim holy site until they hand over Bin Laden and his followers. However, it looks like I will have to wish for bombing the NYT's.

I am not as low-life as the terrosrist so my wish is only in my mind.

Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html

I thought we had all agreed

I thought we had all agreed that the "new" OBL video was a fake

No?

I can't keep up

a few well placed "Bunker Busters" maybe...

a few well placed "Bunker Busters" maybe...a good way to "remember" every year.

v

You might be on to

You might be on to something there...

bunker busters

from vmwc's reference  

"an intense reasearh and development process".

BS

a group of fellows sitting around a lunch table had an idea. they used "on hand assets" and had the first bunker buster in test about a week later.

four weeks after the original lunch the first one made attitude adjustments to one of saddims command and control centers.

 

 

 

Since Mr. Bozell invokes

Since Mr. Bozell invokes the attack on Pearl harbor, I think it's worthy to again note that it wasn't until almost 1947 that Americans thought of December 7th, 1941 as an attack.  During much of WWII, December 7th was observed as the day of America's "defeat at Pearl Harbor".  While the attack was widely acknowledged, the fact that was observed was that we had been attacked and defeated on that day, and now we had to fight back.

If we were to observe 9/11 the way that we observed December 7th during the immediate aftermath, we would be heavilly criticizing our attackers and the government leaders who allowed such an attack to happen.  9/11 would not just be observed as a day that an enemy attacked us, but also as a day to remember that we let our guard down and we paid a price for doing so.  All those "Remember December 7th!" posters weren't meant to urge people to remember the 2,000+ killed at Pearl harbor, they were a reminder to always remain vigilent and keep up the fight. 

If we were to truly remember 9/11 the way we did December 7th during WWII, we would remember the 3,000+ dead, but we would also have rememberances and reminders of how the Clinton administration repeatedly dropped the ball, and how the Bush administration failed to pick it up.

Dropped the ball?

Clinton only dropped the ball? He never even had it in his hands. And he left President Bush with nothing to work with -- remember the "wall of separation" his administration enacted? This prevented communication, so while individual agencies had bits and pieces of information, the "law" prevented consolidation of intelligence.

___________________________________ 

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber

I think Truman had it right

I think Truman had it right when he said "The buck stops here."  If we're to blame Clinton for everything that went wrong on his watch, then Bush should get the blame for everything that happened on his.  Clinton never understood the threat and trashed our intelligence organs.  Bush didn't understand them either and failed to issue an executive order that would have fixed those mistakes.

As Rush was fond of saying...

I think Truman had it right when he said "The buck stops here."

Whereas Bill Clinton's philosophy seems to be, "The buck never got here!"

~~~

If you don't stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them!

Tom -- wasn't Clinton's

Tom -- wasn't Clinton's philosphy more like...

"The suck stops here!"

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

TnT ... Clinton only

TnT ...

Clinton only dropped the ball? He never even had it in his hands.

Actually that's even more on the "ball" than you think. 

According to Col. Buzz Patterson, Clinton managed to lose the nuclear "football" that he is required to carry at all times to enable instant nuclear missile launch.

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

during the election

during the election campaign for the 2000 election rush limbaugh mentioned (no screamed) that the next conservitive president would have a terrible mess to clean up.

i believe that he was referring to the military/terrorist situation.

he was definately right.

C

They Hate America

...nuff said.

  When you think about

 

When you think about it, opposing the continuance of 9/11 memorial services is right in line with the liberal thinking on the subject – make believe it didn’t happen and hope it doesn’t happen again.  Isn’t that exactly what was done after the first trade center bombing and the Cole bombing?

It’s like I said in one of the other threads – the liberals think 9/11 is blown way out of proportion, but they cant come out and say it.

Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"

The NYT, like many

The NYT, like many liberals, feel that patriotism and remembrance are "mawkish" and "gaudy". Not "sophisticated" enough for their elevated intellect. Their attitude kind of makes me want to heave...

The Times double standard...

... to think that they would suggest that we're overdoing the tributes -- while the people who launched the attack are *still* plotting to kill us -- is not surprising but in ridiculously poor taste -- even for the Times. 

 I must have missed the Times piece complaining about how overblown and "stale" the Katrina anniversary tributes were ...

NYT

All I can say is that the NYT better be happy that George Bush is President and not me.  I would ban them from the White House press corps if that were possible.

 I still remember where I was that day, too.  I was walking into my classroom to teach and my students asked me were we getting out of school that day.  I had no idea what they were talking about because I was at work and had not turned on the news.  They said, "We are being attacked." I live in Alabama and we felt the horror of it just as if it had happened in our city. 

NYT Should have been hit.

It's a damn shame the NYT building wasn't hit.  Maybe that would have been a wake up call.  Who here thinks if the NYT building was destroyed, they would have a much better stance on what kind of enemy we face?  What is it going to take?   A tank smashing through one of their own houses and shooting at them?   It is beyond pathetic!

The American Revolution Continued

This definitely needs re-posting....

My fellow NBers, I felt it necessary to post this email I recieved 5 years ago.  It really hit home.  It has everything to do with media bias and end their endangering of us all. 

DO NOT FORGET

I sat in a movie theater watching "Shindler's List", asked myself, "Why didn’t the Jews fight back?"

Now I know why.

I sat in a movie theater watching "Pearl Harbor" and asked myself, "Why weren't we repared?"

Now I know why.

Civilized people cannot fathom, much less predict the actions of evil people.

On September 11, dozens of capable airplane passengers allowed themselves to be overpowered by a handful of poorly armed terrorists because they did not comprehend the depth of hatred that motivated their captors.

On September 11, thousands of innocent people were murdered because too many Americans naively reject the reality that some nations are dedicated to the dominance of others. Many political pundits, pacifists and media personnel want us to forget the carnage. They say we must focus on the bravery of the rescuers and ignore the cowardice of the killers. They implore us to understand the motivation of the perpetrators.

Major television stations have announced they will assist the healing process by not replaying devastating footage of the planes crashing into the Twin Towers.

I will not be manipulated.

I will not pretend to understand.

I will not forget.

I will not forget the liberal media who abused freedom of the press to kick our country when it was vulnerable and hurting.

I will not forget that CBS anchor Dan Rather preceded President Bush's address to the nation with the snide remark, "No matter how you feel about him, he is still our president." I will not forget that ABC TV anchor Peter Jennings questioned President Bush's motives for not returning immediately to Washington, DC and commented, "we're all pretty skeptical and cynical about Washington."

I will not forget that ABC's Mark Halperin warned if reporters weren't informed of every little detail of this war, they aren't "likely --nor should they be expected -- to show difference."

I will not isolate myself from my fellow Americans by pretending an attack on the USS Cole in Yemen was not an attack on the United States of America.

I will not be appeased with pointless, quick retaliatory strikes like those perfected by the previous administration.

I will not be comforted by "feel-good, do nothing" regulations like the silly "have your bags been under your control?" question at the airport.

I will not be influenced by so-called , "antiwar demonstrators" who exploit the right of expression to chant anti-American obscenities.

I will not forget the moral victory handed to the North Vietnamese by American war protestors who reviled and spat upon the returning soldiers,airmen, and Marines.

I will not be softened by the wishful thinking of pacifists who chose reassurance over reality.

I will embrace the wise words of Prime Minister Tony Blair who told a labor party conference, "They have no moral inhibition on the slaughter of the innocent. If they could have murdered not 7,000 but 70,000, does anyone doubt they would have done so and rejoiced in it? There is no compromise possible with such people, no meeting of minds, no point of understanding with such terror. Just a choice: defeat it or be defeated by it. And defeat it we must!"

I will force myself to:

-hear the weeping

-feel the helplessness

-imagine the terror

-sense the panic

-smell the burning flesh

-experience the loss

-remember the hatred

I sat in a movie theater, watching "Private Ryan" and asked myself, "Were did they find the courage?"

Now I know.

We have no choice. Living without liberty is not living.

 

--Ed Evans, MGySgt., USMC (RET.)

Not as lean, Not as mean But still a Marine.

Thanks

Thanks for the post, Six.  We must never forget.

If we should stop remembering 9/11...

"Again there will be the public tributes, the tightly scripted memorial events, the reflex news coverage, the souvenir peddlers. Is all of it necessary, at the same decibel level -- still?"

I suppose, then, that we can cancel future observances of Memorial Day and Veterans' Day? Veterans' Day takes place on the date it does because is commemorates the end of World War One. Hell's bells, that was nearly 90 years ago; definitely time to move on and forget about that one... </sarcasm>

Of course, that would mean two less long weekends for unionized workers. Hm ... bad idea.

~~~

If you don't stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them!

You get Veterans day off?

I don't. Apparently some have forgotten it.

And, isn't Memorial day suspiciously close to D-day?