Geov Parrish, AlterNet

September 11, 2001

Historically, when national and local media respond to a breaking

emergency, speculation and hyperbole take over. On Tuesday morning we

witnessed, again, how powerful media images can electrify a world

instantly; and, how we in the media sometimes use our power

irresponsibly.

For hours in the morning, Tom Brokaw and NBC were reporting that the

Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine -- along with Hamas, one

of the two groups responsible for many of the suicide bombings in Israel -

- had claimed responsibility for the attack. That unsubstantiated claim

turned out to be based upon one anonymous phone call to Abu Dhabi

television, but it lasted for hours, until a DFLP spokesman could call

and explicitly disavow it.

That was just the tip of it. Speculation was rampant, on absolutely no

evidence, that someone Islamic -- usually Osama bin Laden -- was

responsible, but that speculation often broadly invoked "Islam" as

responsible -- using every adherant of one of the world's largest

religions, with a couple of billion believers, as shorthand for

"terrorist." Pat Robertson was on the 700 Club within an hour, blaming

Islam itself, and later, on Fox, talking about Satan and Arabs. It was

reminiscent of what turned out to be grossly inaccurate reports, in the

first few hours after the Oklahoma City bombing, that "Arabs" were behind

it. If I were Arab-American, I'd be scared.

As it became clear that the immediate attacks were over, the talking

heads moved in. Across the country, media localized the story by

reporting on our communal fear. It not only recited the local closings

(done either out of prudence or panic), but, also, as the hours and

repetition wore on, trotted in "experts" who offered speculation as

truth. The cacophony itself added to our communal fear.

Mercifully, no New York official was foolhardy enough to immediately

speculate on casualties. Had anyone put out a number, particularly a

fantastic number, it would have been stripped of caveats and instantly

bandied about as a received truth, adding to the public's sense of panic.

Both national and local media also deserve credit for avoiding excessive

speculation on the numbers of casualties.

But while speculation on who was responsible ran wild, without exception,

not one talking head I saw or heard wanted to touch on the why, except

for occasional references to madmen. But it was, and is, worse than that.

The attackers were not insane; they were engaging in a cold-blooded,

premeditated mass murder of another country's civilians to achieve

political ends. Some of the networks' talking heads -- former secretaries

of state Henry Kissinger and Al Haig come to mind -- had, in the past,

overseen the same things.

Haig, interviewed by CNN's Judy Woodruff, decried that those who might

"quibble," based on "a misguided sense of social justice," with a U.S.

response that takes innocent lives abroad or denies constitutional rights

at home. Woodruff did not question this remarkable assertion.

Our collective, emotional public response is to want vengeance. Who would

feel differently? It's hard to say why this happened, but there has been

so much bloodshed around the world that the U.S. has been associated with

-- often with much higher death tolls than this attack but with fewer

cameras present -- that it's impossible to avoid the conclusion that the

same feelings we have this week -- of fear, vulnerability, rage -- are

the feelings that motivated this cowardly attack in the first place. That

was territory no media reports dared venture into.

Any man's death diminishes me, for I am part of mankind...

John Donne



Of course the US is involved in horrible deads all over the world. We are a superpower after all, however must governments are involved in disgusting acts, but they may not have our resources. I am appalled at any act of violence, it does not matter to me what your political views are, what God or Gods you pray to or what color your skin is. Unfortunately, many people in the world listen to the media and want to focus their anger toward one group based solely on what their government/religion stands for and does in the world. How can you base an opinion on a person by their government/religion that represents the culture that the individual was born into. Did I have a choice to be born American? Do I scream at my government about the fucked-up shit they do? YOU BETTER FUCKING BELIEVE IT!! But I did not even have any power in our last election, so how dare anyone judge me because of my passport!

We do not know who was responsible, but I am certain that our government knew that something catastrophic was going to happen. Does our government/CIA/FBI care about someone's daughter, father or friend who is in their office starting their work day or on a flight across country? NO! I feel that our government wanted something like this to happen to incite the US people. How is it that our state of the art surveillance could not detect this plan? OR was it ignored?

Even if we are big obnoxious capitilistic bores that does not give anyone the right to attack innocent people. I only hope that Americans can learn to be more sympathetic to people in Iran, Egypt & Palestine that are living with terrorism on a daily basis. Until people realize that regardless of their big bank account, nice house and comfortable bed, we can not rest until all suffering has ended. Inflicting more pain on the innocents of the world is probably how our government will retaliate and my sadness and shame for mankind will begin again.