Althouse: The 9/11 recordings.

August 12, 2005

The 9/11 recordings.

Are you listening to them?

9 comments:

goesh said...: No, I'm not. I think I still have some mild PTSD from the attack and I was far away from NY when it happened.; 8/12/05, 10:57 AM
Mom said...: I listened, and I'm a little sorry that I did. It brings it to life all too clearly and puts me emotionally right back there again. How many of those voices from the field belong to people who didn't make it through that day?; 8/12/05, 12:25 PM
Kathy said...: I too found the tapes upsetting. At the same time, it is clear that NYC emergency services were immediately responsive and dealing with the events as they were trained to do.

As an aside, the Times has oddly titled the page "Fatal Confusion," which implies that they view the events of 9/11 as stemming from "confusion" on the part of NYC emergency services, a plainly absurd notion. In fact, someone correctly identified that this was potentially a terrorist attack prior to the second plane hitting.

I do wonder what the heck is in the water over there.; 8/12/05, 12:53 PM
Mom said...: I noticed the same thing. In fact, the transcripts don't sound terribly confused at all. The speakers' descriptions of events seem quite accurate, given the situation, and for the most part they manage to maintain an amazing composure as they speak. But I guess the NYT found a way to hear what it wanted to hear in the recordings.; 8/12/05, 1:04 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Mrs., Katie: I agree. I was listening to the recordings, thinking how together and professional everyone seemed, then noticed the heading "Fatal Confusion."; 8/12/05, 3:00 PM
k said...: Yes, and two things crossed my mind. First, how very proud their families must be of them. Second, how charming their New Yawk accents are. I started just listening to their cadences, while reading the transcripts (which are not very well done at all!) for the words. And it made me sad, of course, as anything from that day/that week does, still does. I agree with you all... there wasn't confusion, at least not any more than what normally exists during any crisis event.

Can someone tell me this? Is "K" the new equivalent of "Over"? Is it because it's shorter to say, and to hear over the radio? And no, that's not why I sign my blogger name "k."; 8/12/05, 4:40 PM
David said...: I am at my parents home and they watch two hours of news each night, so I am listening to them whether I want to or not.; 8/12/05, 7:57 PM
Sarah said...: Plenty of people use "k" in online chats as an alternate to "okay," which serves as a basic "yup, I heard you, you should probably talk again now," signal in that context. I wouldn't be surprised to see it elsewhere.

I can't listen to the tapes more than I have already (just the stuff CNN has played, really.) I still can't watch the footage of the second plane hitting without feeling sick, though, so.; 8/13/05, 3:46 PM
k said...: Sarah: I kinda doubt that veterans of the FDNY would use online chat conventions in their emergency radio dispatches... don't you? See Andrew Scotia's comment.; 8/14/05, 8:50 AM