Page 1 of 2

September 11

PostPosted: Sep 11, 2017 2:33 pm
by Bayowolf
16 year ago something happened. Well it didn't "just happened" as the essay below will explain.

The following essay was written 15 years ago (on the first anniversary) by a conservative blogger whose nom de internet was "N. Z. Bear" who ran a blog aggregation site that was called "The Truth Laid Bear". N.Z. Bear was one of the few conservative bloggers that I actually admired and liked. Sometime during the "Oh, Ohs" he disappeared from the Internet; I really do miss him. :cry:

On September 11, 2002, N.Z. Bear wrote:One year ago today the world changed not at all, but our comfortable perception of it shattered forever. And now, those of us who survived -- who were spared -- find ourselves here, a year older; perhaps slightly wiser; grasping for the right words to honor those we have lost; the right gestures to express our sorrow. To find some way to give meaning to an event beyond comprehension at a human scale; an act so monstrously powerful that in a moment, it cleaved history irrevocably into before and after.

What rituals are appropriate to commemorate the memory of thousands of your fellow citizens murdered on live television as the world watched?

What words can we say; what symbols can we invoke that that can possibly lend meaning to an act of barbarism so grotesque that in its rejection of life; its utter, ultimate futility it defies the very concept of civilization itself?

The task seems impossible. Were there any alternative, the wise course would be to yield; withdraw from the field entirely, and leave the inexplicable unexplained.

There is no alternative. We are here; they are gone, and we are left to make sense of it. And there is still much work to be done.

And so, here I am. To post nothing today would be its own statement, would it not? And not the one I'd care to make. And so... I make my own attempt at meaning, and in my hubris, hope that perhaps I can shed some light into the darkness.
What do I expect on this day?

I fear that our remembrances this year will be dominated by resignation and passivity; will avoid the hard reality that the deaths of our fellow citizens were not accidents, but rather deliberate acts of murder by an enemy whose forces are still at large, and continue to covet American blood.

As you watch today's ceremonies, ask yourself: if you did not know the truth, could the speech you are watching; the ceremony you are witnessing be equally appropriate if those two towers had collapsed in an earthquake?
If the answer is "yes", then my fears have been borne out.
Perhaps I will be proven wrong, but the track record up until this point is not good. We seem to be embracing the role of victim; not just commemorating it, but celebrating it. We are in danger of remembering what occurred a year ago today as a tragedy that just "happened".

But what is being overwhelmed in the cult of victimhood is that forty men and women refused to accept their role as passive victims. They saw the face of the enemy; they learned the evil it had done already and the work it still had left to be done on that day.

And they said "no more". They drew the line: this far, and no farther.

Flight 93.

And suddenly, there it is. Amid the senselessness of that day, clarity appears: a meaning that can be drawn from the death and madness.

The conflict we face now did not begin last September. Whether you define the war against Islamic fascism as beginning in 1979, or in 1993, it had been with us for years; we simply failed to acknowledge that there were indeed fanatics who were sworn to kill us. And so, as horrible as the loss of life was in the Towers and at the Pentagon, as events they were unique only in degree not in kind.

But something unique did happen that awful day. Something the murderers did not expect; something they had not planned.

We began to fight back.

It deserves a name of its own. Whether you call it the "Battle of Shanksville", the "Battle of Flight 93", or just "The Turning Point", it was an event inexorably tied to --- and yet distinct from --- the black sorrow of the rest of that day. And it should not be subsumed under the easy grief that we have come to associate with "9/11".

For it marked the first time in this war that Americans had fought back. In those few scant minutes after the first hijackings, American society finally woke up, analyzed the threat, and acted. Forty people gave their lives in the effort, but the battle was won. There would be no third target on that day; the only harm that Flight 93 would do would be to a deserted field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.

Years from now, I hope the emphasis with which we commemorate the events of this year past will have changed. The loss of life and grief should not be forgotten or minimized. But I think that given time, and perspective, it will become clearer that the event that we should remember most keenly on this day is not the massive loss of life that the terrorists inflicted on us.

It is that one, small battle that occurred over the skies of Pennsylvania, where a group of unarmed American civilians stared their murderers in the face, and in refusing to quietly accept their fate, earned our nation its first victory in this war.
Driving yesterday, I was listening to NPR's Talk of the Nation. In the midst of a panel discussion on American Empire, the inevitable comparison to Rome was raised. And one guest, Victor Davis Hanson of California State University, was asked of the fall of that great empire, and how it had been dragged down by its foes. He said this:
"The problem wasn't the number of enemies. It was the attitude of the people... there was a level of lethargy and there were a lot of people who were asking themselves 'What is it to be a Roman'? And they didn't have an answer for that... When a culture doesn't believe that their civilization is unique, or it's worth fighting for, then it ceases to exist."

I have faith that we, as a nation, will not succumb to the malaise that doomed the Romans. Our time may come: but not now. Not yet.

But the risk is there. If we fail to remember the victory of this day last year --- if we fail to recognize that we must choose between the cult of victimhood or the brave example of the heroes on Flight 93 --- then we may well lose "what it is to be an American".

To my fellow citizens: I ask you to remember this day not just as a time of mourning, but as a celebration of victory. A small triumph; won at a price far too high; but a victory nonetheless. The first, we may hope, of many to come. A turning point in a war that has been waged against us for years; a war that we did not choose, that we do not relish, but one that has been brought upon us. A war that we now find it our responsibility and duty to finish.

To those who lost loved ones on that day: Should any of you read these words, I can only say that my grief is yours. Nothing I can write here will erase your loss; it would be arrogance and presumption for me to try. I can only hope and wish that each of you will find your own way to move forward with your lives, and to remember those that you lost.

And to those who attacked my nation and murdered my countrymen, I say: Hide well. Find the dark places where your empty souls can take solace in the absence of the light. Enjoy your victories where you may.

Because we are coming for you. And no matter how many battles you win; no matter how you have wounded us --- how you will wound us --- you will lose this war.

We have cleared a special place in the dustbin of history for Islamic fascism; tucked gently between the strident, shrill cries of Nazism and the sickly-sweet lies of Communism. It is waiting for you, and it will not have to wait long.

The brave Americans on Flight 93 were the first to see your evil for what it was; were the first to be willing to wager their cherished lives to defy your worship of death; were the first to defeat you in battle. They will not be the last.


Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 11, 2017 6:56 pm
by Americalex
Meanwhile, in America:

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 11, 2017 8:03 pm
by Bayowolf
Starting on 9/11 of 2002 (when I first read the essay that I shared above), I made a point of reading that essay each year; it's part of my observance of 9-11. So I thought that I should, this year, share with y'all. Part of my reasoning was that the day needed to be observed. Also I meet some good, cool, or interesting people as I fly on my Magic Carpet through the Internet; it just happens that N.Z. Bear was all three simultaneously. I was truly saddened when he disappeared from the 'Net and I truly hope that he isn't sick or dead.

So you answer with some crazy shit off of YouTube.


BTW: The water scalper in the second video is a prime example of why some people hate Capitalism.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 11, 2017 10:14 pm
by Americalex
But getting back to the topic of your thread, I found this:

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 12, 2017 12:12 pm
by Bayowolf
"Truther" bullshit was never "the topic of [this] thread". I'm not above listening to "truther" bullshit, mind you; it just wasn't what I had in mind when I was observing the anniversary of the murder of 2977 people (and the maiming or injury of 6000 others) by a gaggle of fucking jihadi ragheads.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 12, 2017 6:27 pm
by Americalex
Right, but isn't 16 years a long time to be playing the emotionalist card in order to justify your beliefs?

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 12, 2017 7:58 pm
by Bayowolf
Americalex wrote:Right, but isn't 16 years a long time to be playing the emotionalist card in order to justify your beliefs?

  1. It's one day a year. A day that deserves remembrance.
  2. And to what beliefs are you referring? Perhaps my belief that the premeditated murder of 2977 humans (and the attempted murder of another million) is immoral? Especially when that murder was carried by a gang of Islamist thugs (who have a sick and twisted belief in their God)?
  3. It wasn't your country that was attacked, so if you are going to begrudge an American's right to remember an attack on America then you need to hold your tongue. Remember: It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 13, 2017 10:07 am
by Americalex
Why double down on the emotionalism like this? Threats and intimidation attempts... is your next play to go all in?

I posted it on September 12th AND you are literally saying that you don't want to discuss 911 on a thread about 911.

If you actually cared about the people who died that day, you would not be angry about no planers or whatever.

You're more concerned with imposing your pretension of how the events took place than honoring those victims.

Ragheads? Really? Racist slurs yet you're supposed to be holding the high ground? I'm not a humanist sorry, I never will be.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 13, 2017 9:21 pm
by Fat Tony
"Inside the Twin Towers" documentary. Regular unprepared citizens as unsuspecting combatants in a one sided battle of a pitiless war. Watching it is as good as reciting the rosary in memory of the casualties, I guess. ( I never prayed the rosary).

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 14, 2017 7:54 am
by Americalex
More trash CGI for liberty loving emotionalists to ejaculate all over. :roll:

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 14, 2017 10:56 am
by Fat Tony
do you mind removing my post then, it was sort of an acid test anyways. Cheers.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 19, 2017 11:04 am
by Windwalker
Fat Tony wrote:do you mind removing my post then, it was sort of an acid test anyways. Cheers.

During the Bush Sr and B Clinton years, the US presence of HUMINT on large swaths of the globe greatly contracted. My thought is this had much to do with reduced budgets in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union, but also was built on hopes that electronic surveillance could largely replace complex and expensive networks of agents, which have to maintain constant vigilance against counter-intelligence measures (up to and including double-agents).

This contraction of the US HUMINT presence (particularly in the Middle East) is often pointed to as one of the primary reasons Saddam's ilk, the Taliban, and Al Qaeda were able to run amuck for as long as they were.

It would likely be next to useless for Canada to maintain a large HUMINT presence around the Globe, considering their security and Defense posture is so naturally aligned with the US and the rest of NATO, and particularly because Canada lacks the force-projection ability to act unilaterally with its military. Even if Canada did have the ability to detect viable threats independently, they would still lack the ability to act on the information without aid from the US or other Coalition States in most cases;

Which ultimately (and perpetually) puts Canada in the unenviable position of being forced to rely on "finished" (i.e. edited) intelligence reports from other Coalition members, running the risk that information from the raw-data which would be relevant to Canada's specific position might be lost in translation...


The best (mechanical) compromise I can think of here, would be Canada covertly gaining parallel access to some of the US raw-data produced by HUMINT networks... However, if/when discovered, this information-stream could not only strain US/Canada relations, but could also serve as a "back-door" to the data by 3rd Party and non-Coalition States...

Another solution would be integrating Canada's and the US intelligence networks to the point where Canada gains access to the information they want through front-channels.... but then the the Sovereignty question comes into play. Is Canada still truly a Sovereign Nation if they allow the Secret Police of their Neighbor integrate with their own Secret Police? I actually can't think of a quicker way of eroding the current state of Canada's independence from the US.

We could start calling Canadian leaders CINO's (Canadian in name only) or some other similar more catchy pejorative if they even considered such action publicly. Probably best to let the majority of the Canadian population continue to think their Nation isn't an American Territory for a few more generations, lol.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Sep 20, 2017 7:46 pm
by Fat Tony
Another solution would be integrating Canada's and the US intelligence networks to the point where Canada gains access to the information they want through front-channels.... but then the the Sovereignty question comes into play. Is Canada still truly a Sovereign Nation if they allow the Secret Police of their Neighbor integrate with their own Secret Police? I actually can't think of a quicker way of eroding the current state of Canada's independence from the US.

As one of the supposed: "inner circle" nations of the US/UK deal of 1946, I think the cart has been placed ahead of the oxen in this regard long ago. This probably is why CSESES is being stretched so thin. Do they really have the support and networks to do the intl intel and domestic intel like they claim? At one time RCMP had the SIRTE role - they lost that role a long time ago and not for budget cuts. Nobody is supposed to know why or even raise the subject. Same old, same old.
The last time Canada excercised its supposed intl networks to host G7 summits , it was a ham fisted exercise. They don't have the werewith all to keep things on an even keel. I don't think they even have their priorities straightened out wrt who they should be keeping tabs on so that is probably why the g7 summits were ham fisted affairs wrt security, just as an example.

In short, we don't have enough data to determine from the outside what is going on with a Cdn. Gov't syndicate. Info is not forthcoming. Things do not add up.


Re: September 11

PostPosted: Oct 09, 2017 7:46 pm
by Fat Tony
Hey Windwalker! I got some more information. In Jack Granatstein's book: "Who Killed the Canadian Military", he states that Canada was excluded from the inner circle of Five Eyes in the aftermath of Chretien's decision to stay out of Gulf War II. If Canada is still in the agreement it might be in the outer circle along with Denmark, etc. We will be paying for Chretien's childish behavior for the next 50 years.
So CESCES has been brought in lol. :mrgreen:

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Oct 10, 2017 1:37 am
by Bayowolf
So I Googled "CESCES"--got back nothing.

Totally super, double-plus secret.


Re: September 11

PostPosted: Oct 10, 2017 1:04 pm
by Fat Tony
Bayowolf wrote:So I Googled "CESCES"--got back nothing.

Totally super, double-plus secret.


It rhymes with another similar sounding word. :mrgreen:

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Nov 15, 2017 7:01 pm
by Fat Tony ... ce-meeting

last year's itinererary (generally speaking) of the Halifax International Security Festival. :mrgreen:

Peter Van Praagh is the president of this conference. Apparently it has been going on for about ten years. What goes on in the conference? Well reps from 70 countries do not come here for the civilized distractions, because there aren't any. So this tells me they come here to do the business and leave. Somewhat similar to the reason Hallmark Cards movies and NBC movies of the week were made here all through the 1990s. :mrgreen:

From what little I can glean on Mr. Van Praagh is that he once was an employee of defence minister Peter Mackay, & that he has written about foreign policy issues in the past.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Jul 05, 2018 9:12 pm
by Americalex
Very interesting independent reconstruction but some very over the top claims, moreso even than the many over the top claims it puts to death lol

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Jul 06, 2018 2:10 am
by Windwalker
He is making the mistake of not factoring in velocity. Metals behave like liquids, not solids, when they impact each other at high velocity.

And to say "rocket fuel can't smash steal, because it is a liquid..." ok I dare him to do a belly flop into a pool of water at 500 miles an hour and see if his flesh looks like a liquid or a solid afterward.

Re: September 11

PostPosted: Jul 06, 2018 9:11 am
by Americalex
lol indeed

The effect of such loading on the residual tensile strength has also been assessed. High velocity impact loading by a small projectile is generally more detrimental to the integrity of a composite structure than low velocity drop-weight impact loading.