Flying into JFK, 9/11/10

Flying into JFK, 9/11/10

Our descent slower than normal
Since the sky swarmed with planes
The houses of Queens blanket
The ground rising beneath us
Our craft thick with travelers
Accented voices burbling
German, English, Indian, Arab, Latin
A supple sampling of our boroughs.

When finally we fell to the ground
And began a long crawl to nuzzle the dock,
Manhattan's delicate silhouette 
Stretched westward for miles
Haloed by the flush of the setting sun
Though clouds lowered high above 
Waiting perhaps to descend.

And to the north,
So many aircraft lined up,
Drifting jaggedly towards earth
Like bright, white flares
Falling from the heavens.

Why Should a Muslim Community Center Be Built in Lower Manhattan?

After I linked to the twitter feed for the Muslim community center in Lower Manhattan, where the center responds to its critics, a friend on Facebook asked me to explain "why the mosque SHOULD be built in this location as opposed to somewhere else, when clearly whatever side you are on it is a divisive thing?" My response follows.

I think it should be built there for a number of reasons:

• Because it's not a mosque and it's not at Ground Zero, it's 4 blocks away
• Because some folks have drummed up fear around this being a Mosque (false) at Ground Zero (also false) where it needn't exist, so why cave into them? The community center location wasn't a controversy until some very radical anti-Muslim individuals began to paint this fictitious version of what it is to be (more on the real origins of this debate here on Salon)
• Because although saying it's insensitive and divisive for it to be there may be the most civilized argument being offered against it, that argument still sort of tacitly conflates Islam as practiced by this really pretty liberal Imam with the radical ultra-violent Islamicists, who attacked us on 9/11, as much for political reasons, as religious
• It's not really insensitive for Rauf to place his community center there (even if it were a mosque) because he's been working in the Tribeca area of Lower Manhattan for about 20 years, a long time before 9/11 - this fact is never mentioned by the folks trying to describe it as a "victory mosque" or whatnot because it would undermine their theory about why it's being built in the first place
• Rauf is precisely the sort if Imam Bin Laden *wouldn't* want building a mosque near Ground Zero because he stands against the violence of Bin Laden and actually encourage communication among the world's religions in ways Bin Laden would despise and denounce (read more about him here)
• The Constitution - specifically freedom of religion and freedom of speech. It's precisely because we don't want to become like Saudi Arabia that we allow a religious center to be built near Ground Zero (along with all the other religious centers, shopping centers, bars, sex shops and strip clubs), even tho we may not agree with every single thing that's going to be said there. In this way, we say, Bin Laden, no, you don't win.
• Many Muslims died in 9/11. They have as much right to grieve and memorialize the 9/11 event, as the rest of us Americans - a listing of Muslim victims on About.com

It's a sensitive subject, I know, so I appreciate that my friends on Facebook were able to engage in a civil conversation about it. But I think it's also a great opportunity for us all to engage in a great dialogue on the subject. It's the folks comparing Imam Rauf's building a community center to Nazis placing a sign at the Holocaust Museum - those folks aren't helping. (Looking at you New Gingrich!)

I think all the arguments above, by the way, can be made irrespective of political party or religious background.

So, in short: I don't think the center has to be built there either. But "there" isn't Ground Zero. And it ain't a mosque, but if it were, no big deal. We believe in freedom of religion. We don't throw in the towel or chuck out the Constitution because a bunch of nutjobs attacked us on 9/11. What an opportunity to prove that to the world.

I decided to post my thoughts on this subject here because I think this event has become a touchstone for so much of what's going on in the United States right now - especially in regards to 9/11, terrorism, and hostility towards Muslims and people of other religions and ethnicities - and I'd like to track my own thoughts on the subject.

Feel free to share your own in the comments.

Complicity

In an NYT op-ed entitled "Art of Darkness" this weekend, Jonathan Lethem laments the fact that no one has been held accountable for the events of the past few years and that it's a pattern that's now being repeated in the financial sector.

If, like me, you’d hoped, distantly, vaguely, probably idiotically, that the 2008 presidential contest might be a referendum on truths documented since the previous presidential election, guess again. That our Iraqi invasion was founded on opportunistic lies, that it was hungered for by its planners in advance of the enabling excuse of 9/11, is a well-delineated blot on American history. But for those of us interested in a conversation about accountability it was always declared to be too soon — we remained unsure of the evidence, or too traumatized to risk fraying the national morale — until the moment when it was abruptly too late, when it became old news.

Yet I suspect it is still the news. While both candidates run on the premise that Washington Is Broken, I’m disinclined to disagree, only to add: our good faith with ourselves is broken, too, a cost of silencing or at best mumbling the most crucial truths. Among these, pre-eminently, is the fact that torture evaporates our every rational claim to justice, and will likely be the signature national crime of our generation — a matter in which we are, by the very definition of democracy, complicit.

Reading this Salon article by Glenn Greenwald, I'd have to say we're seeing Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine in action all over again. A quick visit to her site reveals she feels the same way: It currently showcases a series of articles around the theme of "Disaster Capitalism in Action," all of which discuss the unfloding government bailout of the financial services sector. 

A friend, mapkid, also points out this article by Senator Bernie Sanders. He calls for some accountability, too: 

[I]n addition to protecting the average American from being saddled with the cost, any serious proposal has to include reforms so that we end the type of behavior that led to this crisis in the first place. Much of this activity can be traced to specific legislation that broke down regulatory safety walls in the financial sector and allowed banks and others to engage in new types of risky transactions that are at the heart of this crisis. That deregulation needs to be repealed. Wall Street has shown it cannot be trusted to police itself. We need to reinstate a strong regulatory system that protects our economy.

East Village, New York, 9/11/08

See the above photo, taken tonight, and my This Is New York City photoset on Flickr.

Thoughts on 9/11? Not many. Osama Bin Laden's uncaught. Afghanistan's getting worse while we pour money into Iraq. The war's spreading to Pakistan. We may still be adolescent enough as a nation to elect John McCain President, who's less inclined to diplomacy, more to military might as a solution. (We live in a Bizarro world where the word "diplomacy" is often spoken with contempt, as is the word "liberal.") We're obsessed with the superficial and the facile - witness the praise heaped upon a scarcely qualified VP candidate - and it's greasing the way to our downfall. But, hey, there's a new iPod coming out and it's even thinner than the old one with more storage. Good times.

Apologies for the bitter tone. I think, like many, I just feel shocked (shocked) at how easily so many others are suckered in by the (not even admirable or appealing) surface of things. Sarah Palin's introductory speech to her fellow-countrymen was laced with venom and condescension; nonetheless, she won the instant, unqualified admiration of millions.

Still, take a breath, I tell myself. Take a break from the political blogs. There is still beauty in the world. 

Related:

• Watch this absorbing video lecture on "Will China and India Dominate the 21st Century Global Economy?" Answer: an unreserved "Yes."
• Wigsalon is taking advantage of the instant craze for, yes, Sarah Palin wigs.

The Romance of Travel

Ah, remember the days when flying was a dashing and romantic pursuit? Picture travelers striding purposefully through airports, dressed to the nines for the occasion, the bright, clean lines of the concourse reflected in their brilliant mirrored glasses. No more. Now, getting to your plane is invariably a series of humiliating trials you endure: removing you shoes to pad through a metal detector with padded feet. Trudging through with your pants slipping about your hips, after you've whipped off your belt before a line full of fellow passengers to send it through the scanner after your laptop (which might picked up by someone else who has one of those same Dells companies buy by the thousands).

I stood there today, here at Dulles Airport outside DC, waiting for my shoes, which I could see stuck in the chute just ahead of me as the security officer checked out someone else's luggage, and I watched a 90-year old African woman in a wheelchair getting patted down; long, lean fingers, reaching behind her to her backside to ferret out whatever contraband she might be smuggling through. The nun who accompanied her stood by watching silently. I'm sure the tall, thin young girl executing this search felt awkward doing it, though likely not as uncomfortable as the elderly woman experiencing it.

In these moments, I'm prompted to wonder, how many lives have been saved by millions of people removing their sneakers at a security checkpoint since September 2001? How many terrorists have been foiled because we've abandoned our belts and tripped over our pants cuffs for a 15-foot perp walk? I'm sure some would say, "We'll never know." I'd be willing to bet I could make a stab at an estimate though: zero.

We'll probably cease with some of these measures eventually, whether or not the terrorist threat continues. Why? Because we've abandoned useless measures before. Remember the three questions we used to get asked for years before boarding a plane? (Did you pack your bags yourself? Have you kept your luggage with you at all times? Did anyone give you anything to add to your luggage.) Those questions proved useless against a handful of box cutters, and were dropped after 9/11. Because we realized that since they'd been implemented they'd done demonstrably nothing to increase our travel safety. Besides, if you were a terrorist, were you likely to answer those questions honestly?

So, no doubt, eventually, we'll reverse some of these procedures and/or new technologies will streamline the process. In the meantime, however, we'll just have to learn to accept being treated like chattel. Contented cows, patiently stepping through the requisite chutes in order to reach our desired vehicle: a plane upon, which we're now expected to pay for every additional amenity beyond our seats. Moo!

Debunking 9/11 Myths

Will all the folks who believe the U.S. government played an active role in 9/11 please read this Popular Mechanics article? Please? There are actual real-world problems worth protesting in Union Square. (Yeah, I know that folks who believe conspiracy theories have a pathological drive to avoid evidence which counters what they believe and to seek only that "evidence," which reinforces what they already believe*, but ... a man can hope, can't he?)

There's also an excellent NOVA documentary which details exactly how the WTC towers fell - without being demolished. And please let's dispense with the "no building in the history of architecture had ever collapsed this way" argument, shall we? No building had ever had a jetliner full of jet fuel crash into one of its upper stories, creating the pancaking effect, which NOVA's documentary describes in explicit detail. It doesn't take a degree in physics to understand what happened.

*I feel like there's a whole doctoral thesis waiting to be written on this subject, only someone's probably already done it. The principle applies in general to human beliefs, I think, not just conspiracy theories.

It Takes a Nation of 6-Year-Olds

How refreshing to hear a Republican, Ron Paul, speak candidly about why Osama bin Laden attacked the U.S. on 9/11. Of course, Giuliani immediately has to reach for the old canard that pointing out the reasons is the same as saying we deserved what we got. This clip finishes with a great quote from David Cross, which also speaks the truth with even greater candor:

If the terrorists hated freedom then the Netherlands would be fucking dust. As would Denmark and Sweden, and Switzerland and New Zealand and Canada and every other country that's truly freer than we are.

I don't think Osama bin Laden sent those planes to attack us because he hated our freedom. I think he did it because of our support for Israel, and our ties with the Saudi family and all our military bases in Saudi Arabia. You know why I think that? Because that's what he fucking said! Are we a nation of 6-year-olds? Answer: yes.

"Why did the bad man put the plane in the building?"

"Cos he hated freedom."

"Oh, cos I went to the Lexis Nexis database, and there's over fourteen hundred articles that actually explain wha..."

"Shhhh. He hated freedom. Have a cookie. Get him in the back yard! Show him the outdoor pool!"

Giuliani, you listening? Of course, even if he were, I doubt he'd change his tune. Not when mendacious criticism plays so well with the base. As usual, the jester speaks more honestly than the courtier. Maybe Ron Paul will prove an influential exception. We need folks who get it on both sides of the political divide.

Mission Accomplished

Four years ago George Bush spoke those words, and four years later, they are still premature.

I'm again prompted to wonder where we might be if we had poured our efforts into Afghanistan, instead of invading a second country under false pretenses. For one thing, as this graphic shows, there would be far fewer American and Iraqi casualties. As a matter of fact, U.S. casualties in Iraq surpassed the 9/11 death toll in September of last year.

I incorporated the Iraqi death toll in this graphic not to minimize the deaths of American civilians and soldiers, but to demonstrate that the number of lives taken in our reaction to 9/11 - both American and Iraqi - is of an order of magnitude far, far greater than the lives lost in the United States on that day. And, yes, the vast majority of those lives are Iraqi. It would be intellectually dishonest not to recognize that. And inhumane. Nonetheless, how often is that last figure ever mentioned in the mass media?

Incidentally, these figures do not include the lives of those coalition members from other countries. The total number of coalition casualties (including U.S. troops) stands at 3,624.

It's now barely into 9/11-02. Everything's quiet, and I hope it stays that way. Earlier this evening I came across this powerful new poem, "When the Towers Fell" by one of my favorite poets, Galway Kinnell, in The New Yorker. I had some thoughts of my own about 9/11 today and with any luck, I'll find time to put them down tomorrow. For now, my eyes are tired. They feel like they've been scrubbed with steel wool.

Peace.

Update: The New Yorker link is broken now, but here's a link to another copy of Kinnell's poem.