Why Rembering 9/11 is More than Recalling the Event

On past 9/11 anniversaries, I have been chided, particularly by my Liberal friends, for my affection towards Darryl Worley's September 11 tribute, Have You Forgotten.

No one, they chuckle, has forgotten 9/11.

Recalling the event itself is not enough. We need to remember and embrace the emotional toll that the attacks had on us as individuals and as a nation. We need to remember, as Mr. Worley sings, how it felt that day.

We must never forget the range of emotions that welled in so many of us that morning: the confusion, the horror, the sorrow, the fear, the anger that flowed through us all as we watched the events on TV or in person, or later in a recording.

We need to remember the sense of purpose that drew us all together as a nation. Just a few months after one of the most contentious elections in the nations' history, we were able to put our political divisions aside as President Bush stood atop the rubble, bullhorn in hand, in a calling-to-arms that this nation has not heard for generations.

We need to remember who did this to us and why. In this politically correct world of walking on the safest, thinnest rhetorical line as possible, in an era when our leaders routinely change the terminology of the day, not in an attempt to change history, rather to divert blame and tamper our anger, we cannot forget that this attack, and too many others, were done in a perverted interpretation of Islam. It is they, not the faith itself, who has declared us the enemy.

And we need to remember that this enemy of ours will never stop; they measure victory in years, decades, perhaps centuries. As long as we remain vigilant, their attacks will be small and their victories few.

But, most of all, we must remember the thousands of innocent people who lost their lives that day. The people in the planes, the people in the towers. People no different than you and I, who were going about their day as any other. Going to work, going on vacation. Innocence lost to evil. In all those offices, there must have been someone in his last days at work before retirement; there must have been people there for their first week of work; there may have been delivery people who were there only out of fate; there may have been people there to interview for a job, who had never set foot in one of those buildings before. On those planes, there were people who traveled for work, people going on vacation, perhaps the first in years. Individuals, families. The flight crews who came to work that day as any other, perhaps with plans for later in the day when their flight inevitably touched down.

We must always honor those who gave their lives in a vain attempt to save others. The first responders: the police, fire fighters, people on the street who sacrificed to give aid, those who "went down like heros in that Pennsylvania field" to stop another target from being hit.
We must remember those who sat at home, talking to a loved one on the phone just before dying, the people who watched loved ones trapped in a collapsing tower, those who never heard from their loved ones again. Those who lost a husband, a wife, a mother, a father, a sister, a brother, a child (young or old), a friend.

They, too, are victims. People also like us who kissed their loved one goodbye with a promise to see him or her later in the day. The dinner plans that never came to be; the first date that never happened; the theater tickets never used; the lives that will never be the same.

These were people just like us, who did nothing wrong, but paid the ultimate price to those who did, for no other reason than hatred and true evil.

That is what we must never forget; I for one, never will.

In WTC Mosque, Obama Finds Religion in Local Control

Would it be too much, Mr. President, to (for once) show some respect towards the concerns of the American people?

President Obama, who has shown no limit to his desires to federalize and centralize everything he can -- be it health care, automobile manufacturers, Wall Street salaries, college financing, public school education standards, -- has suddenly Seen the Light in the wisdom of local control.

On the controversial Ground Zero Mosque proposal, Obama throws his weight behind local laws and the US Constitution.

(Religious freedom) includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances," he said. "This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable."

If this is so, why are the "local laws" of Arizona being challenged in court by this Administration? Where did this sudden concern for local control come from? And, why does his concern for local control extend to the local people?

Once again, Obama disregards the reported desires of US citizens as reported in most polls. CNN, for one, reports that 70% of the people they polled stand firmly against the mosque. Obama, NYC Mayor Bloomberg, and most others critical of the opposition to the mosque would have you believe that all these people are anti-Muslim. I find it very hard to believe that "54 percent of Democrats, 82 percent of Republicans, and 70 percent of independents" are prejudiced towards Muslims.

These political leaders are working hard to spin the opposition as people who would deny religious freedom. But, as anyone with a modicum of common sense knows, the concerns have little to do with freedom of religion or the enforcement of local laws and ordinances. The opposition is rooted in propriety.

The Washington Post's Charles Krauthammer summarizes the matter well:

America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.

These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero.

Where was Obama's concern for freedom of religion when he demeaned Americans as people who cling...to their religion? Would he dare criticize those who want to build this mosque as clinging to their religion?

In a blatantly pandering speech on Friday night, celebrating the start of Ramadan, Obama continued to obfuscate and confuse the issue before his Muslim audience, where -- yet again! -- he pointed out the country's past foibles:

This is not unique to our time. Past eras have seen controversies about the construction of synagogues or Catholic churches.

These words eerily echo the bizarre words of Mayor Bloomberg, who tried to compare the concerns over the mosque with religious intolerance in the 1600's and 1700's, well before the US was established.

Spin all you want. This issue is not about religious intolerance, disdain for Muslims, or anything other than propriety and the feelings of those most affected by 9/11.

Where is the tolerance for the families of those killed on 9/11? While Obama manages to mention these folks, he seems to have little interest in their concerns and opinions. Their thoughts on the controversy should carry as much -- if not more -- weight than those who want to build the mosque.

C. Lee Hanson, 77, whose son Peter was killed in the attacks, said he opposed the center not because he was intolerant, but because he believed that building a tribute to Islam so close to the World Trade Center would be insensitive.

“The pain never goes away,” Mr. Hanson said. “When I look over there and I see a mosque, it’s going to hurt. Build it someplace else.”

Do these sound like the words of discrimination?

Would it be too much, Mr. President, to (for once) show some respect towards the concerns of the American people? Concerns that may be well placed. Even if their fears are completely unfounded, shouldn't the President of the United States show some regard for those American citizens making their opinions known?

As the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol points out:

But Obama (like Bloomberg) doesn't feel he even has to engage the arguments against the mosque--because he regards his fellow citizens as emotionally traumatized victims, not citizens who might have a reasonable point of view.

Debra Burlingame, Co-founder of 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America, also said it well:

No one who has lived this history and felt the sting of our country’s loss that day can truly believe that putting our families through more wrenching heartache can be an act of peace.

It is time to introduce some common sense to this debate and stop the name-calling and spin. This is about the loss of loved ones, the loss of innocence for an entire country, and the appreciation of the concerns of the living victims. It is not about the Muslim religion. It is about doing what is right for the people of this country, and not pandering to a special interest with the goal of making us look better to the rest of the world.

As Obama himself said, Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground. Ground Zero is hallowed; and it should be treated that way. Mr Obama, you need to start paying more attention to the words and worries of the local people and less worry about the local laws and ordinances.

I mean, why start the concern over local control now?