September 11 -- Renamed?
On another LJ, there is a complaint about this date being called "Patriot Day". The writer was concerned about, among other things, the "loss of liberty" that followed (I disagree here -- LH), and points out that April 19th is already "commonly celebrated" as Patriots Day.
Another writer asked, "How do you feel about Pearl Harbor Day?"
Indeed. I have mixed feelings about this.
September 11 did bring many Americans together for a time -- with the notable exception of people like ABC News, who banned wearing American lapel pins because it would make them seem less impartial, and some writers in the US who immediately agreed with some European writers that"America had it coming" and "America only got what it deserved."
So far, no one seems to have any problem remembering the day merely by reference to the date. Even in Rome, I saw "We we never forget 11 September" signs on a store window.
Should the day get a different name?
First, I am against watering down the word "Patriot" -- and I am disappointed at the notion commonly seen these days that patriotism is itself a bad thing. The use of this name -- and the name chosen for the "Patriot Act" for that matter -- are harmful to patriotism per se by the underlying negative connotations in the minds of many.
Second, such a renaming obscures the original event. Pearl Harbor day is the commemoration of the attack on Pearl Harbor -- perhaps "World Trade Center Day" is more appropriate. (Yes, this misses the Pentagon and the other flight -- but such names must be succinct to be workable at all.)
There's another aspect, though: Do you remember February 26th in this context?
The World Trade Center towers were attacked by jihadists on February 26, 1993 as well as September 11, 2001. The first time was, happily, less effective -- the towers did not collapse as they'd hoped.
But the attacks were the same in intended harm -- and had the first one been placed differently, it might have killed 20,000 people or more. (Just as 9/11 would have had the buildings not remained up as long as they did.)
Usama bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein had their fingerprints in that first event as well, though distantly. And the Jihadist War on America had truly begun in earnest.
But I must, ultimately, come down on the side of opposing the name "Patriot Day" for this commemoration, and I don't think it needs a name at all. After all, 911 was the US number denoting "emergency" long before this occurred.
And we know that the jihadists are striving to put many more such days on our calendar, without success as yet. We must keep our focus on eliminating that threat to the East and West (and to moderate Islam) -- this name is a distraction.
===|==============/ Level Head
Another writer asked, "How do you feel about Pearl Harbor Day?"
Indeed. I have mixed feelings about this.
September 11 did bring many Americans together for a time -- with the notable exception of people like ABC News, who banned wearing American lapel pins because it would make them seem less impartial, and some writers in the US who immediately agreed with some European writers that"America had it coming" and "America only got what it deserved."
So far, no one seems to have any problem remembering the day merely by reference to the date. Even in Rome, I saw "We we never forget 11 September" signs on a store window.
Should the day get a different name?
First, I am against watering down the word "Patriot" -- and I am disappointed at the notion commonly seen these days that patriotism is itself a bad thing. The use of this name -- and the name chosen for the "Patriot Act" for that matter -- are harmful to patriotism per se by the underlying negative connotations in the minds of many.
Second, such a renaming obscures the original event. Pearl Harbor day is the commemoration of the attack on Pearl Harbor -- perhaps "World Trade Center Day" is more appropriate. (Yes, this misses the Pentagon and the other flight -- but such names must be succinct to be workable at all.)
There's another aspect, though: Do you remember February 26th in this context?
The World Trade Center towers were attacked by jihadists on February 26, 1993 as well as September 11, 2001. The first time was, happily, less effective -- the towers did not collapse as they'd hoped.
But the attacks were the same in intended harm -- and had the first one been placed differently, it might have killed 20,000 people or more. (Just as 9/11 would have had the buildings not remained up as long as they did.)
Usama bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein had their fingerprints in that first event as well, though distantly. And the Jihadist War on America had truly begun in earnest.
But I must, ultimately, come down on the side of opposing the name "Patriot Day" for this commemoration, and I don't think it needs a name at all. After all, 911 was the US number denoting "emergency" long before this occurred.
And we know that the jihadists are striving to put many more such days on our calendar, without success as yet. We must keep our focus on eliminating that threat to the East and West (and to moderate Islam) -- this name is a distraction.
===|==============/ Level Head