The Robertses Spit On The Memory Of 9/11

I'm going to say some decidedly un-liberal things here, but I don't care (and I also posted here - "slumming it" a bit, so far).

As I've often said, the Bucks County Courier Times ends up attracting a substantial amount of wingnuttery to its Op-Ed page, and the latest from Cokie and Steve Roberts ended up there yesterday (from here, a column that was written a week ago, as it turns out).

And what is ironic is that, for a change, there are some reasoned observations about how Obama can (and has) reach(ed) out to Muslims to mark an end to the wholesale demonization of an entire people and religion by Obama's predecessor and his Republican handlers in the political-media-industrial complex (with Dubya talking about how he wasn't waging war against Islam in general on the one hand while condoning torture primarily of Arabs on the other).

However, what really got me in the Robertses column was this...

No one is minimizing the significance of 9/11, but it happened more than seven years ago. Seven years after Pearl Harbor, Americans were rebuilding Japan and Germany. So it's entirely proper for Obama to rebuild America's relationship with the Muslim world. And he can start at home, by ending racial profiling.

I really don't know how to respond to that exactly, but I'll try.

First of all, it doesn't matter if 9/11 happened seven years ago or seventy; the need is no less great for this country, acting in its own interests as well as that of much of the world, to hasten the day when Osama bin Laden's head is eventually mounted onto a post and paraded around the town square. Does that mean we have the right to kill innocent civilians in Afghanistan or Pakistan with attacks from drone warplanes or other means? No.

Second, comparing the legitimate fight against al Qaeda (with 9/11 being an intelligence failure above all else, let's not forget) to a war against a nation-state shows a rather startling lack of historical perspective. Our fight in Afghanistan is primarily one of winning hearts and minds by replacing one ingrained idea (killing infidels) with another (America and NATO can successfully help you rebuild your homes, schools, clinics, and public infrastructure better than those pretending to act in your interest ever could, which would go a long way towards eliminating the root causes of terrorism - of course, saying that is the easy part; delivering on it is the sticky part).

And using 9/11 as an excuse to end racial profiling? Huh?? (That's a topic for another day that requires more detailed analysis, I'll admit).

Apparently, to the Robertses (and much of this country, I would guess), 9/11 is a social-political demarcation point, an abstraction of a sort, but not much else (helped along by the grandstanding antics of characters like Rudy Giuliani, I suppose - one of the only columns J.D. Mullane of the Courier Times ever wrote that I actually agreed with is one from years ago where he envisioned what it would be like the day that 9/11 became something remembered only in history books, and a new generation found themselves wondering what the "big deal" was...it was heavy handed, but I still think it showed what was, for him, an unusually deft touch in my opinion).

As I've said in the past, my sense of outrage and loss from that day is no better or worse than anyone else's (driving home on the PA Turnpike wondering if a plane would fall on me, diverting the young one from the news reports, getting choked up hearing "Angel" by Sarah McLachlan after learning about "morgue barges" on the Hudson River - you can fill in your own memories at least as well as I can).

I just can't imagine how any American, knowing what they know of that day, could just say that seven years is enough to internalize what happened, but now, partly because we have a recently elected Democratic president, we're supposed to stuff all of our own personal baggage about it away into a closet, turn out the light and lock the door (starting the paragraph by saying "no one is minimizing the significance" is cowardly and disingenuous; that's exactly what the Robertses are doing).

And I detest the implication from the Robertses that the events of that day require additional sacrifice on our part somehow (you can make a credible argument for why we must "rebuild (relations) with the Muslim world," but NOT one based on 9/11). I'm sure that would indeed be unwelcome news to the brave souls commemorated here, among the others we lost that day.

I will admit, though, that the Robertses are quite right when they say "we have to listen carefully to each other."

However, they should start by listening to themselves first.