NYPost

WHERE'S THE ANGER? August 29, 2002 --

THE first anniversary of Sept. 11 fast approaches, and the ceremonies have been set: intense, commercial-free TV coverage of what promises to be simple, dignified, yet extremely emotional proceedings at Ground Zero.

But there's something missing.

We'll see the pain and the grief. We'll see the loss of widows and widowers, of children who lost parents. We'll see the uniformed services commemorating their comrades' heroism and sacrifice.

But what has happened to our anger?

The acute rage, the white-hot fury that nearly all Americans felt in the immediate aftermath of the horrifying murders of 3,000 people seems to have dissipated.

And, with it, the resolve that saw Americans united on the need to utterly demolish international terrorism.

Which is one reason why, increasingly, the skeptics are seizing control of the debate over how America should respond: They're ridiculing President Bush's rhetoric about the "axis of evil" and raising fears that confronting international evil is not worth U.S. casualties.

It's almost as if we want to put the shocking memories out of our minds - even as we obsess over our loss with the kind of forlorn grief that we normally reserve for dead celebrities.

To that end, the networks have promised not to air the sickening footage of the planes hitting the Twin Towers.

I understand the pain that such video may cause those who lost loved ones in the carnage, but America - and the world - need to be reminded, as forcefully as possible, just what happened that morning. We need to see the footage again and again. We need to recall, vividly and acutely, the horror and the heartsinking fear we all felt that day.

Even from the outset, some details seemed too bloodcurdling to discuss. The New York Times, for example, was widely - and wrongly - criticized for publishing a large photo showing several victims jumping from the blazing towers.

Consider how appalling the situation must have been up there that scores of people willingly jumped hundreds of feet to certain death in order to escape the flames. It enrages me just to think about it - and it should enrage everyone.

And yet the late-night talk-show hosts long ago began working Osama bin Laden jokes into their monologues. The murderer of 9/11, with the blood of thousands of innocent people on his hands, has become grist for the nightly joke mill.

Even David Letterman, whose stunned and tentative demeanor on his first post-9/11 show captured the national mood like nothing else, sees no reason not to make jokes like this one the other night: "Osama bin Laden is back running al Qaeda. I guess this means their leader got back from vacation before our leader."

We've grown so obsessed with the monthly ceremonies and the size of the permanent memorial, as psychobabblers run around seeking "closure" for the survivors and the families, that we've forgotten just what bin Laden unleashed on this country.

Has our national attention span really become so short? I'm sorry, but I don't want to see mournful processions and bagpipes playing "Amazing Grace" over and over. I want to see a rekindling of the unrestrained anger we once felt.

I've seen conservatives rage for years about Bill and Hillary Clinton. I've seen liberals who still can't discuss the 2000 elections without uncontrolled fury. Why don't we still feel the same way about bin Laden?

I also want to see the same determination to vanquish the enemy that Americans displayed 60 years ago when 2,300 of our countrymen were murdered at Pearl Harbor.

On Dec. 7, 1942 - the first anniversary of what was still angrily being called Japan's "sneak attack" - The Post's headline was: "Wrathful City Marks Pearl Harbor Day With Grim Resolve." The editorial page said, "The test of character of a man or a nation" is "how he pulls himself off the floor and slugs his way toward victory."

Can we honestly say that 9/11 has done the same thing for us?

Yes, taking drastic action on the basis of unrestrained emotion can be dangerous. More often than not, it's necessary to step back a bit and gain some perspective.

But it's just as dangerous when the pendulum of emotion swings to the opposite extreme - and we forget what and why we are fighting.

-- Anonymous, August 29, 2002

Answers

They should show the footage again.

No commentary. Show [without sound] the first plane hit the tower and disappear. Cut to the second one going into the next tower and disappearing. then show the towers fall. Cut. All silent.

Then begin the ceremonies planned at ground zero.

This will put the country in the correct frame of mind, I think, to get the most out of what is planned for 9-11-2002.

Of course, Osama may have other plans...

-- Anonymous, August 29, 2002

There's a major incongruity here. I'm not one for PDA (Public Displays of Affection) or PDA (Public Displays of Grief), but consider this: \It is the current fashion, and has been for some years now, for public outpourings of emotion on some events of national/international importance. The most recent of these is the fence surrounding the house where the two Oregon City girls were buried, where not only flowers, teddy bears and other tokens appear but also emotional messages from various people, many of whom didn't even know the girls. For an international example, the death of Princess Diana is the glaring benchmark.

Anothe emotion often seen is that of adoration of various rap or movie stars. People line up all night for tickets to a concert or for a front-row view at the Oscars or other awards.

So why this lid on video that might provoke anger--which translates to support for any action against any terorrist? Oops. Did I just answer my own question? (Duh!) Is this the liberal media engineering the mood of the country again?

-- Anonymous, August 29, 2002

The ceremonies at ground zero will attack the heart strings.

Yeah, I think you hit on something there, Git.

-- Anonymous, September 03, 2002

Don't cha know that some people have slept since then? They have forgotten it completely.

As for me, the fire still burns deeply within me. As with last year when it happened, hubby is now gone. I don't expect another attach on the anniversary so I'm not worried about that. I am still madder than hell and find it hard to be ... em... er.... PC.

Give me a scorpion and a terrorist/suspected terrorist and I'll make em sing!

-- Anonymous, September 03, 2002

Remember that film by those two French brothers? They just happened to be filming a documentary on a fire station's activities in NY city and were in the lobby, filming, when the bodies stared thunking on the ground. A few clips of that particular footage (with sound, of course) might remind people. That film was the best record of how it was.

-- Anonymous, September 04, 2002

Read Time Magazine. Its 11 pages and they don't pull the "thunks" out of it at all. Listen to Bill O'Reilly...he doesn't pull the "thunks" out either. And neither do I. I have a hard time controlling my rage and find myself being very politically incorrect. I no longer buy gasoline where an Arab family owns the station. Why? Becasue they never said one damn word about it to me. They acted like it never happened and that pissed me off. And I told them that I would not be back and that they damn well better get an American Flag up there on that pole!! Taz

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2002

I hear ya Taz, but it could be that the gas station owners are a bit nervous about things and don't want to start anything that could get someone's panties in a twist.

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2002

Personally, I have yet to be able to get really angry because the grief for my country.......what it was and what it has become, is still so overpowering. I need no sound bytes or replays of the buildings falling to remember that on that day everything that I have worked for all my life would rapidly be destroyed.

-- Anonymous, September 05, 2002