Thats not true. We should at least attempt to predict what will happen given any political move. At least one guy should know what is going on.
Sean
New York's Sept 11 museum to display hijacker perspective
- Thread starter Big Don
- Start date
Sean
celtic_crippler
Senior Master
I'm all for a "Why the Terrorists are Nut-Jobs" wing in a museum.
Nice twisting of my words.
My post was obviously a dis on the low-brow citizenry.
...obviously. It had nothing to do with your assertion that it was necessary for everyone to be exposed to the hijacker's persepctive in order to effectively erradicate terrorism? That you somehow expect every citizen to see this display and suddenly go :duh: -"holy crap! That's it! I have the answer to ending world terrorism!"
We got a pretty good idea why they hate us. History is rife with reasons and examples.
And...at the risk of sounding rude... it's obvious as to why our soldiers are being maimed and killed. We're at war.
I have no idea how your retort remotely pertains the the post. :idunno:
RTFM
I choose not to know what that means. You are right ignorance is so freeing.
sean
Live True
Brown Belt
In the end, I think it's as much about presentation as anything.
I for one, do think that having thier words in a museum, possibly in a memorial, is appropriate.
Here's why:
It's not to help folks sympathize with them.
It's not so we can get touchy feely with our inner child.
It's so we can try to understand the situation as a whole.
It's not as simple as "they hate us", or "we're free" because they
don't hate us as individuals and many of the folks that go and train
at these camps are coming from "free" countries.
It's so we can understand that the motivation is partly ideology, and it's partly training and indoctrination...
and....here's the ironic part...
That training/indoctrination is done by fostering a superficial, hatred-based, misinformed or partly informed, religiously justified or ideology justified mentality.
So, do we become our attackers by encouraging partial truths to comfort us? Or do we become the people we are supposed to be (joe average is not some dumb schmuck unless you encourage him to always be so)?
As for presentation....I would NOT, be it museum or memorial, place the attackers words front and center and glorify it. however, I think it's completely appropriate to have it as part of the presentation. It doesn't have to be flashy or large, but it should be there.
I for one, do think that having thier words in a museum, possibly in a memorial, is appropriate.
Here's why:
It's not to help folks sympathize with them.
It's not so we can get touchy feely with our inner child.
It's so we can try to understand the situation as a whole.
It's not as simple as "they hate us", or "we're free" because they
don't hate us as individuals and many of the folks that go and train
at these camps are coming from "free" countries.
It's so we can understand that the motivation is partly ideology, and it's partly training and indoctrination...
and....here's the ironic part...
That training/indoctrination is done by fostering a superficial, hatred-based, misinformed or partly informed, religiously justified or ideology justified mentality.
So, do we become our attackers by encouraging partial truths to comfort us? Or do we become the people we are supposed to be (joe average is not some dumb schmuck unless you encourage him to always be so)?
As for presentation....I would NOT, be it museum or memorial, place the attackers words front and center and glorify it. however, I think it's completely appropriate to have it as part of the presentation. It doesn't have to be flashy or large, but it should be there.
celtic_crippler
Senior Master
It means, or rather suggests, that it's a good idea to read everything if you intend to post an relevant retort.
Let me know how that freedom works out for you.
I'll grant you that to a certain extent...
Museum, I agree. Memorial, I disagree.
The bottom line is a memorial is something intended to celebrate or honor the memory of a person or event. Now if you feel it does not dishonor the memory of those who died to share a 9/11 memorial with terrorist propoganda, then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. You won't convince me otherwise.
From an educational standpoint I don't have a problem attempting to understand their motivations. I actually do, as I've picked up a History book once or twice...
I just think a Memorial is an inappropriate place.
What "partial truths" are you referring to?
The "people we're supposed to be"? I don't suppose you'd like to supply the rest of us with that memo so we'll all know what that is? Seriously, post that would you?
Perhaps Joe-Average knows that a museum is a building, place, or institution devoted to the acquisition, conservation, study, exhibition, and educational interpretation of objects having scientific, historical, or artistic value and is a more appropriate place for this than a memorial.
I vote for neon signage.
And there should be a gift shop too...where you can buy replica box cutters.
Live True
Brown Belt
CC, disagreement is fine with me. I'm not trying to bring anyone to my side as much as point out my own thoughts. I am NOT trying to lead you to the dark side (cue heavy breathing).
As to your question about dishonoring the memory of those who died by sharing terrorist propoganda....that's not quite how I see it nor is it my intent...I can see how that would be an easy viewpoint...so let me try to explain my point....I can only put it in terms of my personal experience, which does not...in ANY WAY OR STRETCH of the imagination compare with the tragedy of the survivors of 9/11...it's like comparing gnats to pteradactyls (sp?). so please keep that in mind.
When I lost my mother to a drunk driving accident at a very young age, I spent a lot of time being angry and a bit irrational to the concept of seatbelts (it was a rare case of contributing to her injuries and death), drinking/driving, redneck *******s, and a number of other random things. Later, as part of the healing and moving on process, I wanted to know more about what happened and why..what was that stupid !@#$%thinking? Turns out he killed two people in his own car as well, and committed suicide a few months later out of guilt/remorse/whatever....did I forgive him? eventually. Does that mean what he did was right and forgotten? HELL NO! Did that mean I wanted to weep over his grave? ARE YOU FRIGGIN INSANE?!?! But, understanding the bigger picture was part of my healing process and allowing me to move on.
Is that everyone's process...no, i'm sure it's not. And I'm not saying it should be. But I think that should be an available option for those who may want or need that as part of THIER process. Again....present and part of the display doesn't mean a significant and glorified part of it.
And I'll grant you that seeking out that information was my choice, and after some time has passed. Perhaps, as I think MA CAver stated, it has not been long enough. Perhaps, as has also been stated, on the site of the towers is not the best place. But I think at 8 years and counting, we should consider it. I also think that the site of this tragedy may be the best place for something like this. Again, it's all in the presentation.
I think it makes sense to offer it as an optional part of the display, especially as it was my understanding this was a museum as well as a memorial...no one has actually confirmed it's meant to be one or the other or both. The OP title states museum. When I went to the Holocaust museum in DC, there was a cattle car that was used to transport Jews to the camps. It was to the side of one of the rooms, and placed in a way you could walk around it, or through it....it was very distressing for some, so it was...optional....again, it's the presentation. Make it a part of the museum, but make it optional and tasteful...not glorified...being part of the exhibit does not imply agreement or "right-ness" for lack of a better word.
As of the "people we're supposed to be"...ok..I think that was a bit presumptious and obnoxious. What I MEANT was do we take the easy comforting partial truths or do we look at the full picture and THEN make up our own minds based on facts...not bits and pieces that fit what we want to think.
NOW, keep in mind, I don't think that's going to mean we'll all agree on the motivations, events, etc.....and I would be upset if that were the case...I jsut prefer arguments to be based on facts as well as emotions and beliefs...not just cherry picked items that fit our already established beliefs....if you come to the same conclusions after examination of all the facts, even if you disagree with me...I'm good with that.
As to your question about dishonoring the memory of those who died by sharing terrorist propoganda....that's not quite how I see it nor is it my intent...I can see how that would be an easy viewpoint...so let me try to explain my point....I can only put it in terms of my personal experience, which does not...in ANY WAY OR STRETCH of the imagination compare with the tragedy of the survivors of 9/11...it's like comparing gnats to pteradactyls (sp?). so please keep that in mind.
When I lost my mother to a drunk driving accident at a very young age, I spent a lot of time being angry and a bit irrational to the concept of seatbelts (it was a rare case of contributing to her injuries and death), drinking/driving, redneck *******s, and a number of other random things. Later, as part of the healing and moving on process, I wanted to know more about what happened and why..what was that stupid !@#$%thinking? Turns out he killed two people in his own car as well, and committed suicide a few months later out of guilt/remorse/whatever....did I forgive him? eventually. Does that mean what he did was right and forgotten? HELL NO! Did that mean I wanted to weep over his grave? ARE YOU FRIGGIN INSANE?!?! But, understanding the bigger picture was part of my healing process and allowing me to move on.
Is that everyone's process...no, i'm sure it's not. And I'm not saying it should be. But I think that should be an available option for those who may want or need that as part of THIER process. Again....present and part of the display doesn't mean a significant and glorified part of it.
And I'll grant you that seeking out that information was my choice, and after some time has passed. Perhaps, as I think MA CAver stated, it has not been long enough. Perhaps, as has also been stated, on the site of the towers is not the best place. But I think at 8 years and counting, we should consider it. I also think that the site of this tragedy may be the best place for something like this. Again, it's all in the presentation.
I think it makes sense to offer it as an optional part of the display, especially as it was my understanding this was a museum as well as a memorial...no one has actually confirmed it's meant to be one or the other or both. The OP title states museum. When I went to the Holocaust museum in DC, there was a cattle car that was used to transport Jews to the camps. It was to the side of one of the rooms, and placed in a way you could walk around it, or through it....it was very distressing for some, so it was...optional....again, it's the presentation. Make it a part of the museum, but make it optional and tasteful...not glorified...being part of the exhibit does not imply agreement or "right-ness" for lack of a better word.
As of the "people we're supposed to be"...ok..I think that was a bit presumptious and obnoxious. What I MEANT was do we take the easy comforting partial truths or do we look at the full picture and THEN make up our own minds based on facts...not bits and pieces that fit what we want to think.
NOW, keep in mind, I don't think that's going to mean we'll all agree on the motivations, events, etc.....and I would be upset if that were the case...I jsut prefer arguments to be based on facts as well as emotions and beliefs...not just cherry picked items that fit our already established beliefs....if you come to the same conclusions after examination of all the facts, even if you disagree with me...I'm good with that.
Gordon Nore
Senior Master
Thank you.
Gosh almighty. When the former president that bit of maudlin reasoning, I shook my head several times to make sure I heard what I thought I heard.
A museum exhibit is not a newspaper. You don't read it and trash it. A museum exhibit is a broad multi-dimensional document that should stand for a number of years. Picture this exhibit, fifty years on when most of us here are dead, and there are very few people walking around who witnessed 9/11 on television or in person as adults.
Add to this scenario a little plaque that says, "They hate because we're free."
Museum curators, to be sure, have an obligation to be respectful of the dead; however, they also have an obligation to sustain history -- all of it -- and nurture the intellect.
Shotgun Buddha
Brown Belt
Just from an outsider point of view here, having a museum at the site of what occured is something that makes sense and has occured in other places around the world. The Documentary Centre in Nuremberg is one of the better examples I know of this, its bulit beside the Zeppelin fields that were used as Nazi rally grounds. Inside the centre is a full and thorough breakdown of how the Nazi's rose to power, process of the Holocaust and the events that transpired within Germany.
The information contained there, and the understanding of it is in many ways vital to preventing anything of that nature occuring again.
However:
this centre wasn't built until 1994 when it was possible to gather and present this without it tearing open wounds that hadn't healed.
Building a museum now to 9/11 at Ground Zero, it would be impossible to show the information in a way that doesn't hurt more than it helps quite frankly.
A memorial yes. But as I think this thread has shown, its far too soon for many people to want to examine it in that light. Its just throwing salt on the wounds.
The information contained there, and the understanding of it is in many ways vital to preventing anything of that nature occuring again.
However:
this centre wasn't built until 1994 when it was possible to gather and present this without it tearing open wounds that hadn't healed.
Building a museum now to 9/11 at Ground Zero, it would be impossible to show the information in a way that doesn't hurt more than it helps quite frankly.
A memorial yes. But as I think this thread has shown, its far too soon for many people to want to examine it in that light. Its just throwing salt on the wounds.
Similar threads
