Arizona 9/11 Memorial-An Insult?

[MrsSpringsteen]

By Paul Davenport, Associated Press | September 27, 2006

PHOENIX -- The Republican candidate for governor says the state's recently dedicated Sept. 11 memorial should be torn down, calling it an insult to America because of wording that he says criticizes the United States and fails to adequately honor victims and military personnel.

The monument was ``supposedly put in place to remember the losses of 9/11, an evil attack on our nation that killed thousands of innocent Americans," Len Munsil said Monday at a rally near the capitol. ``Instead it reminds us of American failings and American mistakes, real and imagined before and after 9/11. This memorial is a tribute to moral relativism."

The 54 laser-etched inscriptions on an arc that circles the structure include many from a Sept. 11, 2001, timeline, while others trace events following the terrorist attacks. Topics range from the deployment of 216 Arizona firefighters to the World Trade Center to questions of whether the federal agencies could have uncovered the plot.

The memorial includes quotations such as ``You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles" and highlights chronological events such as ``Congress questions why CIA & FBI didn't prevent attacks" and ``Erroneous US air strike kills 46 Uruzgan (Afghanistan) civilians."

Right below an inscription noting that President Bush addressed the nation the evening of Sept. 11, 2001, is one stating that an unidentified terrorist leader addressed the American people in 2004, Munsil said.

``Only in the relativistic context of left-wing protesters holding `Bush is a terrorist' signs do such inscriptions make any sense," said Munsil, the former head of a conservative Christian advocacy group who won the Republican gubernatorial nomination in the Sept. 12 primary.

Munsil said some parts of the memorial are fine but that the structure should be torn down and replaced with a new one that includes the phrases ``Let's roll," ``United We Stand," and ``God Bless America."

Governor Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, defended the memorial as a tribute to 9/11 victims and first-responders and said some inscriptions were being taken out of context. ``I'm just sorry that they're trying to politicize 9/11. That's just wrong," she said

 

[Macfistowannabe]

"You don't win battles of terrorism with more battles"
"Congress questions why CIA & FBI didn't prevent attacks"
"Erroneous US air strike kills 46 Uruzgan (Afghanistan) civilians."

These statements belong in quotations from the 9/11 Commission Report, not on a 9/11 memorial.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

No one else has an opinion on this? Gee, there are usually so many opinions around here..

 

[U2DMfan]

I like memorials and tributes that are simplistic and allow the people who want to memorialize or pay tribute to formulate ideas, images and words in their own heads. I think it's more effective.

This memorial sounds like they were trying to memorialize that day in some sort of historic context? If public funds paid for it, as it appears to me, then I'd say he has every right to bitch about it.
I don't know if it's as political as just a little silly.

 

[AEON]

No one else has an opinion on this? Gee, there are usually so many opinions around here..

This is almost too ridiculous to comment on. A memorial for a tragedy as grave as this should be simple, somber, and at the same time a bit hopeful.

Can you imagine the Pearl Harbor memorial with inscriptions like "What did Roosevelt really know?" "You don't defeat war with more war"

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I think it's strange- for example, with all the war memorials in DC and wherever, where are there any political questions, statements, etc? There is certainly a place for all that and we should question, what could have been done differently, how it was handled, and all of that. But it's like when there is an attempt at a simple memorial type thread here and some people can't just leave it at that. I know if I had lost someone that day, I wouldn't want to go to a memorial that had all kinds of political stuff written on it. That doesn't mean I would want to shield myself from all that or pretend it doesn't exist, but I just don't think it belongs there.

The Vietnam war must have been the most controversial war in our history, but none of that is on The Wall. And this was a terrorist attack, not a war. And making statements about the war in Iraq and Bush on a 9/11 memorial is certainly a political statement.

And I don't think it's too ridiculous to comment on - I think there might be some people here who have no problem with it. I'd like to hear why if they don't, that's all.

 

[Irvine511]

I think it's strange- for example, with all the war memorials in DC and wherever, where are there any political questions, statements, etc?

[q]Operation Names Added to Gravestones

By David Pace
Associated Press
Wednesday, August 24, 2005; Page A13

Nearly all Arlington National Cemetery gravestones for troops killed in Iraq or Afghanistan are inscribed with the operation names the Pentagon selected to promote public support for the conflicts. That was not the case with earlier wars.

Families of fallen soldiers and Marines are being told they have the option to have the government-furnished headstones engraved with "Operation Enduring Freedom" or "Operation Iraqi Freedom" at no extra charge, whether the service members are buried in Arlington or elsewhere. A mock-up shown to many families includes the operation names.

The vast majority of military gravestones from other eras are inscribed with just the basic information: name, rank, military branch, date of death and, if applicable, the war and foreign country in which the person served.

Families are supposed to have final approval over what goes on the tombstones. That has not always happened.

Nadia and Robert McCaffrey, whose son Patrick was killed in Iraq in June 2004, said "Operation Iraqi Freedom" ended up on his government-supplied headstone in Oceanside, Calif., without family approval. "I was a little taken aback," Robert McCaffrey said, describing his reaction when he first saw the operation name on Patrick's tombstone.

"In one way, I feel it's taking advantage to a small degree," he added. "Patrick did not want to be there; that is a definite fact."

[/q]

 

[AEON]

Irvine, you certainly have a knack for comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Irvine511]

Irvine, you certainly have a knack for comparing apples to oranges.

it's EXACTLY the same thing.

where else have i compared apples to oranges?

 

[BonosSaint]

"Munsil said some parts of the memorial are fine but that the structure should be torn down and replaced with a new one that includes the phrases ``Let's roll," ``United We Stand," and ``God Bless America."

Good, let's replace political with political.

My opinion. No politics on any memorial, one way or another.

 

[AEON]

it's EXACTLY the same thing.

where else have i compared apples to oranges?

Listing the battle where a soldier perished (Gettysburgh, Antietam, Iwo Jima...etc) on his military tombstone is not the same thing as carving a political opinion into a memorial for 3,000 that died brutal, horrific deaths.

 

[Irvine511]

Listing the battle where a soldier perished (Gettysburgh, Antietam, Iwo Jima...etc) on his military tombstone is not the same thing as carving a political opinion into a memorial for 3,000 that died brutal, horrific deaths.

good gosh, read more closely:

[q]Nearly all Arlington National Cemetery gravestones for troops killed in Iraq or Afghanistan are inscribed with the operation names the Pentagon selected to promote public support for the conflicts. That was not the case with earlier wars.[/q]

the graves dosn't say "Fallujah" or "Baghdad." and the PENTAGON is paying for this.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Good, let's replace political with political.

My opinion. No politics on any memorial, one way or another.

I would agree, no politics at all. But Let's Roll didn't start out as a political statement, it's been turned into one by some people perhaps. I have a United We Stand t-shirt that I bought shortly after 9/11, I don't consider wearing that shirt a political statement .I would think it was funny and sort of lame if people assumed certain things about my beliefs, political and otherwise, from that shirt-or from my little God Bless America pillow that my Mom gave me. Some political statements are blatant and maybe some are in the eye of the beholder, and are colored by one's political views and other factors. The ones in Arizona appear to be blatant.

 

[verte76]

I have an opinion. It's that a memorial should be simple and to the point. It doesn't sound like this is an example. It's more sophisticated, a bad word for this purpose but I can't think of a better one. "You don't win wars with battles" is a slogan. There should have been just one slogan, not three. That's overkill.

 

[deep]

they should add

Weapons of Mass Destruction

and

Yellow Cake

and

Mushroom Cloud

to the monument

because without these terms
constantly drumbeated into
the American public consciousness

these young Americans
would not have been offered up as cannon fodder

 

[deep]

and put

Cannon Fodder

on the list, too

let the truth

free their poor souls

 

[Irvine511]

and put

Cannon Fodder

on the list, too

let the truth

free their poor souls

and this is why we cut taxes for the wealthy, and social services, while drilling blind patriotism into our youth, so that we can maintain a permanent underclass: we need Cannon Fodder.

 

[maycocksean]

This is almost too ridiculous to comment on. A memorial for a tragedy as grave as this should be simple, somber, and at the same time a bit hopeful.

Can you imagine the Pearl Harbor memorial with inscriptions like "What did Roosevelt really know?" "You don't defeat war with more war"

I agree and. . .

 

[maycocksean]

the graves dosn't say "Fallujah" or "Baghdad." and the PENTAGON is paying for this.

. . . I agree.

 

[maycocksean]

I would agree, no politics at all. But Let's Roll didn't start out as a political statement, it's been turned into one by some people perhaps. I have a United We Stand t-shirt that I bought shortly after 9/11, I don't consider wearing that shirt a political statement .I would think it was funny and sort of lame if people assumed certain things about my beliefs, political and otherwise, from that shirt-or from my little God Bless America pillow that my Mom gave me. Some political statements are blatant and maybe some are in the eye of the beholder, and are colored by one's political views and other factors. The ones in Arizona appear to be blatant.

Perhaps you didn't get the memo? The Republican Party recently purchased the rights to patriotism and all expressions of love of country.

I say "Let's roll" all the time and had been saying it for years before 9/11. There's nothing particularly heroic or patriotic about it. I don't think the person who said it on United 93 intended it to be that way either. It was just a phrase he used a lot.

You might as well put "Let's bounce" on the memorial.