September 11, 2017

"Another 9/11 Anniversary... Amid Hurricane Irma."

Today is 9/11, and we've come to expect solemn remembrance of the horrible destruction that took place 16 years ago, but there's ongoing real-life destruction in the news. Hurricane Irma has sole possession of the headlines this morning. I looked for stories that combine the news of the hurricane with remembrance of 9/11 and found very little. There's "Wife of 9/11 victim to mark day with hurricane relief" at The Boston Herald. That's small and tasteful. At The New Yorker, there's a different kind of effort to attach the 2 stories, "Another 9/11 Anniversary at Guantánamo, Amid Hurricane Irma" (by Amy Davidson Sorkin).
[A] measure of the futility of the legal response to the attacks is that there will soon enough be young military officers, at least eligible to serve as the equivalent of jurors on the military commission, who were also born after 9/11....

Meanwhile, the base made it through Irma relatively well, with downed power lines but few signs of damage, Rosenberg reported. There were, she noted, a few wet spots in the courtroom ceiling, which would need new tiles. The next time hurricane winds shift to Guantánamo, it might be better prepared. And the 9/11 trial, with its maddening mix of tragedy and absurdity, and its too-delayed promise of justice, might even be under way.

66 comments:

Laslo Spatula said...

"Amy Davidson Sorkin"

The decision to have two last names factors into my analysis of the writer's writing.

I am Laslo.

Ray said...

From 2011 a retrospect of the past 10 by Victor Davis Hanson. Amazing what has changed, and not changed in the U.S. and in The Middle East.
https://www.city-journal.org/html/ripples-911-10907.html

Ray said...

Agree with Laslow, it's an indicator of a view point.

Look at her previous writings to see if correct:
https://www.newyorker.com/contributors/amy-davidson-sorkin

exhelodrvr1 said...

The hurricane should be the main focus, but it also allows the media to minimize discussing Islamic terrorism. If there was some story that could be twisted into a negative about Pres Trump, that would be getting a significant amount of the media's attention now, despite the hurricane and the 9/11 anniversary.

Lyssa said...

My 4 year old noticed it and had questions when we saw it on the news, so I had to explain it. It was harder than I expected. He wanted to know why the bad people wanted to hurt people, and I definitely couldn't come up with a good answer. I still have to fight back a few tears to talk about it. Amazing how that will be ancient history to him. We're flying tomorrow (hopefully - it's to Florida), so I opted to leave out the part where airplanes were involved.

Kate said...

The difference between news media, which is now always anticipating or reflective, but never current, and the immediacy of new media. On twitter people are on fire about 9/11. I haven't seen an Irma tweet in hours.

Sebastian said...

9/11, 9/11, what was that about, anyway?

Michael K said...

I understand that CNN (which I don't watch) is a little disappointed that the hurricane is not the "killer hurricane" they expected.

Laslo Spatula said...

I was in at work Saturday and had YouTube playing in the background.

Listened to a Craig Finn performance that was an in-studio at KEXP.

In the interview section they talked about a song where Finn recounts watching the Twin Towers fall from a friend's rooftop.

The interviewer referred to it as Nine-One-One.

I am Laslo.

Quaestor said...

[A] measure of the futility of the legal response to the attacks...

The left has spent these 16 years hectoring America about the futility our military response to 9/11, saying we should treat it as a crime rather than an act of war. Now that the legal aspects of our reply are forming up they've changed the tune — more futility. Connecting 9/11 to Irma helps them sell the notion of the attacks as an act of Nature — a storm, a destructive wind with no one to blame. Trying the Guantanamo prisoners is as futile as serving a writ on a hurricane is really what they're saying. Soon enough they'll connect 9/11 to Global Warming — America's obscene carbon footprint toppled the towers.

Laslo Spatula said...

The song is "Newmyer’s Roof.”

I am Laslo.

Quaestor said...

CNN is a little disappointed that the hurricane is not the "killer hurricane" they expected.

If one seeks to understand the psychology of the climatistas one must first realize that the cult of "climate change" lives not within the realm of science despite the jargon they spew. They are modern Millerites, and like them, they look forward to an imminent apocalypse which will destroy the deplorable miscreants (i.e. conservatives, capitalists, and the proudly heterosexual) and usher in the New Age. And like the Millerites, they retreat en mass to the "mountain tops" only to descend in dejected disappointment when the brimstone fails to fall from the heavens.

The Drill SGT said...

measure of the futility of the legal response to the attacks is that there will soon enough be young military officers, at least eligible to serve as the equivalent of jurors on the military commission, who were also born after 9/11....

That quote exemplifies her innate biases.


In a simpler world, we would have squeezed these guys dry, lined them up against a wall and shot them.

Khesanh 0802 said...

There is a 9/11 article on the front page of today's online WSJ.

MayBee said...

At first I thought the quote "the base made it through..." and thought she was referring to the Republican base.

Ann Althouse said...

"The decision to have two last names factors into my analysis of the writer's writing."

She was well known as Amy Davidson (as my tag is some indication). I'm surprised that an established writer would add the husband's name when she married. Even if legally you choose to take on the husband's name, why should your byline change? A woman works to become a familiar name, and then she must rebuild familiarity (and expect readers to participate in the work and to deal with a more unwieldy name). Men virtually never do that.

Ann Althouse said...

"There is a 9/11 article on the front page of today's online WSJ."

Not at the top of the front page.

Same with the NYT. There's something on the front page, but the top of the page is entirely devoted to the hurricane.

Humperdink said...

"I understand that CNN (which I don't watch) is a little disappointed that the hurricane is not the "killer hurricane" they expected."

Good news/bad news: Good news: the killer storm surge did not materialize, at least where my relatives hunkered down. The projected 6'-10' surge turned into 0". That's right, zero.

Bad news: Next time, fewer people will heed the call to evacuate.

CWJ said...

Lyssa,

Time flies. I remember when you where excitedly waiting for Althouse to post a cafe so you could tell us youe were expecting that self same 4 year old.

Gahrie said...

A woman works to become a familiar name, and then she must rebuild familiarity (and expect readers to participate in the work and to deal with a more unwieldy name). Men virtually never do that.

Patriarchy!!

rhhardin said...

We ought to be past the weepy 9/11 stuff (it's not American but womanish) there's audience money in it.

The trouble this year is that the better weepy stuff is hurricane-related.

Michael K said...

" I'm surprised that an established writer would add the husband's name when she married."

Very Bourgeois.

rhhardin said...

7/11 never forget apparently a Trump slip.

tcrosse said...

" I'm surprised that an established writer would add the husband's name when she married."

At least she didn't hyphenate the double-barreled name.

Professional lady said...

Our local fire department gets out its largest fire truck and extends the ladder with an American flag hanging from it. It's on a main thoroughfare so a lot of people see it and it's a very moving sight. I made a point of driving by it this morning on my way to work. I was glad to see they are still doing it.

rhhardin said...

9/11 changed Halloween forever. From 80 kids to almost none, a state that has continued.

SeanF said...

Ann Althouse: A woman works to become a familiar name, and then she must rebuild familiarity (and expect readers to participate in the work and to deal with a more unwieldy name). Men virtually never do that.

The actress who played B'Elanna Torres on "Star Trek: Voyager" had just gotten married when she was cast. She had been acting for several years before as Roxann Biggs, but intended to begin using her new married name - until she saw how much make-up and prosthetics she'd be wearing in the role. She was concerned that she'd lose that familiarity because she wouldn't be recognized, so she was credited as "Roxann Biggs-Dawson" for the first couple of years, until the show became established. Then she started using "Roxann Dawson."

For a related male example, the actor who played Dr. Bashir on "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" also changed his name partway through the show's run, from "Siddig El Fadil" to "Alexander Siddig," apparently just for the hell of it.

rhhardin said...

For author names I'd stay with the old one, even if you plan on staying married.

It's a brand.

Khesanh 0802 said...

Ann: to split hairs with you there is a headline in the middle column on 9/11 in the WSJ. We have been asking the MSM to get their priorities straight and I would say a current hurricane vs. a 16 year old disaster celebration is handled appropriately by the WSJ. 9/11 is no longer "news". The memorial service is "news".

rcocean said...

Actresses rarely change their stage name.

Maybe this writer didn't think she was well known enough.

Ralph L said...

Her picture sure looks cartoonish.

Lyssa said...

CWJ, it touches me that you remember that!

rcocean said...

The New Yorker is the arch typical liberal mag.

After 911 their first thoughts were "What about the poor Muslims?" and "OMG, all this awful American patriotism. How gauche!"

Khesanh 0802 said...

Kaley Cuoco (Penny) married and used her hyphenated name. Took one season and she dumped the name and the guy!

Ralph L said...

there will soon enough be young military officers
If you consider 5 years to be "soon enough."
She manages to semi-absolve Obama by blaming Republicans for intimidating him.

The Drill SGT said...

Ralph L said...
there will soon enough be young military officers
If you consider 5 years to be "soon enough."


I never ever saw anybody junior to a Major on a General Court, much less a death penalty trial, so add 2 (cause 21y/o 2LTs would be rare) + 10+ years to your calculation.

my guess: 18 more years before you'd see a post 9/11 officer on a death penalty trial.

2LT's don't get near any trials, even summary courts.

Ralph L said...

SGT, thanks for clearing that up. I gave her the benefit of the doubt and removed the ">" before the 5. I assume there's a minimum age for receiving a commission.

Why did she italicize "jurors?"

MadisonMan said...

A 16-year anniversary of anything is not news.

Similarly, you don't see much on the anniversary of the sinking of the Maine, or even D-Day now.

Time Marches on.

David said...

"I understand that CNN (which I don't watch) is a little disappointed that the hurricane is not the "killer hurricane" they expected."

That's the way it seemed to me. And not just them. And now they are making excuses for their exaggerated predictions.

David said...

I don't really care what Sorkin's political point of view is. This article reminds us of our massive institutional failure on this matter. There is plenty of responsibility to go around.

The Drill SGT said...

Ralph,

Today the requirement is at least a BA degree and 18 y/o for OCS.

At other times hit has been HS grad, plus a very good testing panel. And there were always two lists. One for BA's and one of "others"

I went through the OCS board process as a 19 y/o with 2 years of college, went on the waiting list, but was sent to Nam and told "reapply when you return"

I subsequently obtained a Regular Army commission after finishing my BA. Also got a fully funded Top 5% fellowship to grad school.

Big Mike said...

Bad news: Next time, fewer people will heed the call to evacuate.

Yes, that's the down side of over estimating the impact of a storm -- any storm, not only hurricanes.

Ralph L said...

They should publicize loudly how long it takes for basic utilities to resume service.

Ralph L said...

told "reapply when you return"
At least they didn't say "if."
Kudos to you for signing up when most were running away.

Jim at said...

"Similarly, you don't see much on the anniversary of the sinking of the Maine, or even D-Day now."

Except those wars are over.

The current one is not. Far from it.

Robert Cook said...

"The left has spent these 16 years hectoring America about the futility our military response to 9/11, saying we should treat it as a crime rather than an act of war."

It's been worse than futile...it's been catastrophic. We've carried on a decade and a half campaign of destruction and death in a widening number of countries, killing more innocent people in the process than were killed on 9/11...all for what? It was a crime and should have been treated as such. However, it serves the state to put the nation on a war footing...it enriches the arms merchants and other corporate entities who service war needs, and allows the government to militarize the nation, justifying omnipresent government spying on the populace and any short- or long-term repression of our freedoms as they "deem necessary."

Robert Cook said...

"Except those wars are over.

"The current one is not. Far from it."


That's because we won't stop carrying on with it.

Quaestor said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quaestor said...

Claire Boothe's early work (acting, what there was of it, and writing, what there was of it) was done under her birth name (or maiden name if one doesn't find that too offensive) while she was married to George Brokaw. When she wed Henry Luce she proudly wore the whole name — Clair Boothe Luce. Perhaps it was to honor her husband (unlikely, CBL was so acerbic her idea of honor consisted of not offering witty insults) but was more likely to have been a way to disarm her critics, mostly leftish and mostly mediocre, of the obvious attack, she gets published because she married a publisher. Or it may be she justed liked the sound of Claire Boothe Luce with its internal near-rhyme. Anyway, she was beautiful, witty, charming, conservative, feminist when feminism wasn't cool, and too smart for the comfort of the radical chic crowd who despised her, and she used both surnames. And she wrote sentences that I still don't understand.

Quaestor does not care what name someone chooses [Well, that's not true... Bruce Jenner calling himself Kaitlyn Jenner strikes me as disingenuous, banal (A 60-something cereal-box icon names himself after an 80s valley girl, break me a fucking give. If you going to "re-assign" your gender you might as well choose a decent name while you're about it. "Antonia Jenner" — now that's a name with some class.) and frankly insane.] It what's under the byline that counts, and what's beneath Amy Davidson Sorkin's strikes me as suspect.

SeanF said...

Khesanh 0802: Kaley Cuoco (Penny) married and used her hyphenated name. Took one season and she dumped the name and the guy!

The first episode of "Friends" to air after Courtney Cox married David Arquette added the surname "Arquette" to all six main cast members' names. Jennifer Aniston Arquette, Matt LeBlanc Arquette, etc.

Howard said...

Is it too soon to put up a statue to Mohammed Atta next to the WTC? We need to preserve history.

CWJ said...

Lyssa,

You're welcome. I tend to remember good news. Sorry for the strange typos. I was hunting pecking on my tablet without my reading glasses.

Michael K said...

We've carried on a decade and a half campaign of destruction and death in a widening number of countries, killing more innocent people in the process than were killed on 9/11...all for what?

We've got a ways to go to catch your hero, Stalin.

Howard said...

Good point, Doc. I can imagine using that line on a patient before surgery: "don't worry about a thing, my colleagues tell me I've got a ways to go to be known as a butcher."

Bill Peschel said...

"This article reminds us of our massive institutional failure on this matter. There is plenty of responsibility to go around."

There wasn't any failure:

* Bush protected Saudi Arabia, which we're learning played a major role in planning and financing the attack.

* Bush got us involved in nation-building in Afghanistan, instead of toppling the country, declaring victory and leaving.

* Bush destabilized Iraq and toppled Hussein, planting us into another nation-building attempt and fueling terrorism worldwide (take your pick, a strong man who wants to Westernize the country or Iran). (And, yes, he was working on reviving his nuclear and WMD program, I agree.)

* Bush also founded the TSA, one of the most expensive and worthless Potemkin programs that has ever since made air travel a nightmare and burden the budget with an army of unionized bureaucrats.

* Bush also got the Patriot Act passed, which opened the door to data collection and spying on Americans that Obama took advantage of in the last campaign.

So now we have a military that is, in essence, a worn-out treasury-draining army for hire that's sent to fight without Congressional approval, a Constitution that contains the Bill of Suggestions, and a mostly one-party system protecting the rights of corporations to loot the treasury with free money that the rest of us pay through devalued dollars that is actually hidden inflation.

That's how I recall 9/11.

Gahrie said...

We've carried on a decade and a half campaign of destruction and death in a widening number of countries, killing more innocent people in the process than were killed on 9/11...all for what?

Oil, the Patriarchy and White Power.

Gahrie said...

Oh..and it was all on orders from the Illuminati.

Michael K said...

Howard, I once knew a professor of surgery named Harvey Butcher.

Michael K said...

That link was to another surgeon winning the Harvey Butcher award.

This one is to his papers.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Speaking of butchers, I don't really have any problem telling/showing the Ummah that if they kill 3000 of ours, we kill three million of theirs. Maybe they'll learn. Oh, who am I kidding?

Howard said...

Michael: My neighbor had to have a shoulder replacement recently. The VA guy was named Butcher, so he decided to use his private insurance instead. I think I would prefer a surgeon named Butcher because they have an extra motivation to be a cut above. Of course, any superficial trait, such as bedside manner, is not a first order proxy for competence.

Howard said...

Blogger Bad Lieutenant said...
Speaking of butchers, I don't really have any problem telling/showing the Ummah that if they kill 3000 of ours, we kill three million of theirs. Maybe they'll learn. Oh, who am I kidding?


That's exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted. Why do you hate America so much that you would like us to fall into Al Qaeda's trap?

“I believe the perception caused by civilian casualties is one of the most dangerous enemies we face.” U.S. General Stanley A. McCrystal in his inaugural speech as ISAF Commander in June 2009.

exiledonmainstreet said...


"That's exactly what Osama bin Laden wanted. Why do you hate America so much that you would like us to fall into Al Qaeda's trap? "

Horseshit. What Osama bin Laden wanted is us quaking in fear and behaving like pussies.

How absurd to think they want us to fight. No, they want us to bend over - which is exactly what Europe is doing.

Read up on the history of Muslims who kidnapped Europeans and Americans in the early 1800's. Where do you think "the shores of Tripoli" in the Marine Corp anthem came from? They stopped with the piracy when we kicked their ass.

You are just rationalizing your own cowardice and desire to appease.

Howard said...

The only cowardice and desire to appease was when GW Bush told America to go shopping, then put on a wedding dress and danced for the Saudi princes to ensure no doubt he was their bitch. Your example of the Barbary pirates was a good one because the US went after the source of the pirates. What we did in response to 911 was to deliberately not attack the country of origin of the pirates who flew our planes into our buildings. Instead, we attacked Iraq, a former ally, and bombed Afghanistan from the neolithic into the paleolithic. Iraq and Afghanistan are weakened enemies of Iran who has become a much stronger regional power as a result... bought and paid in blood and treasure courtesy of the USA.

Why do you hate America so much?

Bad Lieutenant said...

Howard, you're a funny guy. Let's see...


1) The South wanted a fight too. How'd that work out for them?

2) How long do you think they can keep it up? At 1000:1 casualty ratio, which I'm sure could be improved upon it we weren't so nice, the West loses a million or so dead, but on the other hand, the Arabic language is now spoken only in Hell. Assuming the classic breaking point of 30% of fighting age males, figure we lose 150,000 men, but then they are broken and fear us more than the monster they conceive of as God.

Incidentally, most of the 3m or so dead Muslims since 2001 have been killed by other Muslims, which is terribly convenient. If we can just contrive to sell them the weapons to do it, it's a self-licking ice cream cone.

3) What OBL specifically wanted was for us to invade KSA, because then you get the whole sacred jazz and wide outrage, opposition, etc. This is clear from the fact that most of the 9/11 crews were Saudis. If they'd wanted us to invade Iraq or Iran, they'd have used Iraqis or Iranians.

It seems reasonable to infer that you wanted us to go straight at KSA, so why do YOU hate America, you America-hater, you?

4) Iraq was a former ally? In which war did Iraqi and American forces fight side by side? What treaty governed this alliance? I missed that one.

5) Yeah, about strengthening Iran with American treasure. Bush did it the hard way. Obama just wrote 'em a check.

Bad Lieutenant said...

6) Oh yeah, McChrystal. Didn't Obama fire him?