Does anyone else get a chill...

Qwikshot · 08-29-2003, 06:54 AM

reading the 9/11 transcripts.

I tell you I read over them (I only knew of one person who was killed in the event, my franternity brother's mother and two narrow brushes, my best friend from grade school usually worked in the tower, but a meeting was cancelled from there to downtown, and a roomate from college and fraternity brother who arrived late to the Pentagon) and I just cannot help feel that even after all the Afghanistan and Iraq hoopla, that these transcripts only bring the pain back.

Does anyone else think that maybe the transcipts should have been held off? I don't want to sound cold but while it was a traumatic event to behold, to experience in some way, it was okay to disassociate from it because it wasn't me, it wasn't my family, and by reading these transcripts I saw mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters. The call where a sister got false information that her brother was not near the tower when in reality he was killed was painful to read.

Does it make me feel better that we have attacked the terrorists? Has anything really changed since 9/11? Perhaps they released them to remind us, perhaps to foment us into continuing our support against terrorism.

Should we, the public, read these last words of men and women, some waiting for rescue, some trying to rescue.

Is this how older generations felt when Pearl Harbor was hit? At least their enemy had a face, it seems that in our times, we just get shadows.

Honolulu_Blue · 08-29-2003, 07:04 AM

I have no interest in reading these transcripts. I started reading the first one and just stopped. They're too painful. About two weeks after it I happened, I was sitting at home watching 'Dateline' or something. It was all about last minute or last second communications, telephone calls, all this sort of stuff. It crushed me. It was at that point I realized I couldn't take anymore. I turned it off. Nothing has changed since that day.

I don't really see the value in releasing them to the public. It's just sensationalism. If I had one of these conversations, I wouldn't want it to be made public. What good does it serve? These were probably the most horrible and terrifying moments of these peoples' lives and I don't think they should be on public display. Then again, I assume (I hope) that people were asked whether they wanted these published or not.

oykib · 08-29-2003, 08:11 AM

I agree with you, HB. If you're not a family member, then you shouldn't have access. There is no public good to be served by releasing them.

It reminds me of a sitution from some years ago. Willim Shatner's wife was drowning in their pool and he can't swim. He made a frntic call to 911 and it ired on the local news.

That event really disgusted me. The news program had pulled one of those "Star Trek character death teasers" instead of giving a real preview of what was to come. It was one of the events that made me stop watching mainstream news media regularly.

Ben E Lou · 08-29-2003, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Honolulu_Blue
Then again, I assume (I hope) that people were asked whether they wanted these published or not.

I haven't followed the story closely, but I think someone sued to have them released. That's a classic example of legal rights trumping good sense.

WussGawd · 08-29-2003, 08:27 AM

The New York Times sued for their release under the Freedom of Information Act.

Like some of you, I decided about a week after the attacks that I'd read enough and heard enough about it. I found the coverage to be very upsetting to my oldest son, and I didn't think there was much further point to watching CNN/MSNBC/CNBC, et al. for more repeats of the same info.

However, I'll have to disagree with the other premises here. This is news. There are some people who are interested in what went on, and this may be very important information from an historical perspective. The information should have been released, though I feel it should have been released earlier to the people directly affected by the tragedy. Though I personally have no real desire to relive the horror of that morning again, I do believe that the press had good reason to sue, and that this information should be public at this point. I can see the information to be of great historical value in the right hands.

FYI, the suit only won transcripts, not the recordings. The transcripts were only of people who identified themselves...no anonymous calls. I think the level of painfulness for the victims might have reached a whole different level had they actually got to hear their loved ones (and you know MSNBC would have enjoyed playing those sound bites ad infinitum) choking to death in a burning building. I think it was a very reasonable compromise.

Ben E Lou · 08-29-2003, 08:54 AM

Wuss:

It sounds like you know a lot more about it than I do. (As I said, I haven't been following this really.) If everything you say is accurate, then I've got no problem with it, and stand corrected.

John Galt · 08-29-2003, 08:59 AM

So far, I've found the reading to be painful and horrible, but I'm glad the trasnscripts were released.

I don't think the public should shy away from this reading. While the media is sure to sensationalize it, I think knowing what happened is important in a collective greiving process. Reading has allowed me to revisit those days and reminds me of what is important in life.

Buccaneer · 08-29-2003, 06:04 PM

You guys should have seen the 9/11 exhibit at the Smithsonian Musuem of American History. That was something to actually see and hear the events via recordings, videos and news casts.

SunDancer · 08-29-2003, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by WussGawd
The New York Times sued for their release under the Freedom of Information Act.

Aren't there limitations though, as such as privacy to families, ect...

Buccaneer · 08-29-2003, 07:26 PM

Not when you got a sensational story to tell.

WussGawd · 08-29-2003, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SunDancer
Aren't there limitations though, as such as privacy to families, ect...

Apparently, the court didn't think so...though I believe this was actually settled out of court.

JPhillips · 08-29-2003, 09:32 PM

Wuss: From NPR I heard that the judge did in fact order the release. The Port Authority had settled but then backed out and the judge took it from there. Its interesting legally because now the Port Authority has been shown to be under the Freedom of Information Act. As a multi-state agency they have been essentially private and confidential for years. This really changes things for them.

As to the transcripts, this is important history. Its first person accounts of a defining event in the history of the US. Would you be against WWII films or Vietnam oral histories? I don't diminish the pain this may cause for some families, but in the long run I believe the free flow of information will be better for us and future generations. I want people to know the human horror of this event. It makes it personal in a way that numbers and distant tv images just can't. This was a human tragedy and these transcripts help illuminate the humanity of those caught by history.

WussGawd · 08-29-2003, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JPhillips
Wuss: From NPR I heard that the judge did in fact order the release. The Port Authority had settled but then backed out and the judge took it from there. Its interesting legally because now the Port Authority has been shown to be under the Freedom of Information Act. As a multi-state agency they have been essentially private and confidential for years. This really changes things for them.

Ah, ok. I missed this nuance.

Quote:

As to the transcripts, this is important history. Its first person accounts of a defining event in the history of the US. Would you be against WWII films or Vietnam oral histories? I don't diminish the pain this may cause for some families, but in the long run I believe the free flow of information will be better for us and future generations. I want people to know the human horror of this event. It makes it personal in a way that numbers and distant tv images just can't. This was a human tragedy and these transcripts help illuminate the humanity of those caught by history.

Exactly. As controversial as this is to a sizable minority, and to the families, I believe that this is another way that people may remember what it was like. I am sympathetic to the families, and can understand their emotions, but it is important enough that it should remain public.

sianews · 08-29-2003, 10:48 PM

We shouldn't release them?? They should be read aloud on TV - daily, along with video. Americans cannot be allowed to forget what that day was like. Sadly I feel many already have

.

08-29-2003, 07:04 AM	#2
Honolulu_Blue Hockey Boy Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Royal Oak, MI	I have no interest in reading these transcripts. I started reading the first one and just stopped. They're too painful. About two weeks after it I happened, I was sitting at home watching 'Dateline' or something. It was all about last minute or last second communications, telephone calls, all this sort of stuff. It crushed me. It was at that point I realized I couldn't take anymore. I turned it off. Nothing has changed since that day. I don't really see the value in releasing them to the public. It's just sensationalism. If I had one of these conversations, I wouldn't want it to be made public. What good does it serve? These were probably the most horrible and terrifying moments of these peoples' lives and I don't think they should be on public display. Then again, I assume (I hope) that people were asked whether they wanted these published or not. __________________ *Steve Yzerman*: 1,755 points in 1,514 regular season games. 185 points in 196 postseason games. A First-Team All-Star, Conn Smythe Trophy winner, Selke Trophy winner, Masterton Trophy winner, member of the Hockey Hall of Fame, Olympic gold medallist, and a three-time Stanley Cup Champion. Longest serving captain of one team in the history of the NHL (19 seasons).

08-29-2003, 08:27 AM	#5
WussGawd College Benchwarmer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Avondale, AZ, USA, Planet Earth, Milky Way Galaxy	The New York Times sued for their release under the Freedom of Information Act. Like some of you, I decided about a week after the attacks that I'd read enough and heard enough about it. I found the coverage to be very upsetting to my oldest son, and I didn't think there was much further point to watching CNN/MSNBC/CNBC, et al. for more repeats of the same info. However, I'll have to disagree with the other premises here. This is news. There are some people who are interested in what went on, and this may be very important information from an historical perspective. The information should have been released, though I feel it should have been released earlier to the people directly affected by the tragedy. Though I personally have no real desire to relive the horror of that morning again, I do believe that the press had good reason to sue, and that this information should be public at this point. I can see the information to be of great historical value in the right hands. FYI, the suit only won transcripts, not the recordings. The transcripts were only of people who identified themselves...no anonymous calls. I think the level of painfulness for the victims might have reached a whole different level had they actually got to hear their loved ones (and you know MSNBC would have enjoyed playing those sound bites ad infinitum) choking to death in a burning building. I think it was a very reasonable compromise. __________________ "I guess I'll fade into Bolivian." -Mike Tyson, after being knocked out by Lennox Lewis. Proud Dumba Elect of the "Biggest Dumba of FOFC Award" Author of the 2004 Golden Scribe Gold Trophy for Best Basketball Dynasty, It Rhymes With Puke. Last edited by WussGawd : 08-29-2003 at 08:29 AM.

08-29-2003, 08:54 AM	#6
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Wuss: It sounds like you know a lot more about it than I do. (As I said, I haven't been following this really.) If everything you say is accurate, then I've got no problem with it, and stand corrected. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'! Last edited by Ben E Lou : 08-29-2003 at 08:54 AM.

08-29-2003, 08:59 AM	#7
John Galt Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: The Internets	So far, I've found the reading to be painful and horrible, but I'm glad the trasnscripts were released. I don't think the public should shy away from this reading. While the media is sure to sensationalize it, I think knowing what happened is important in a collective greiving process. Reading has allowed me to revisit those days and reminds me of what is important in life. __________________ I do mind, the Dude minds. This will not stand, ya know, this aggression will not stand, man. - The Dude

08-29-2003, 09:32 PM	#12
JPhillips Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Newburgh, NY	Wuss: From NPR I heard that the judge did in fact order the release. The Port Authority had settled but then backed out and the judge took it from there. Its interesting legally because now the Port Authority has been shown to be under the Freedom of Information Act. As a multi-state agency they have been essentially private and confidential for years. This really changes things for them. As to the transcripts, this is important history. Its first person accounts of a defining event in the history of the US. Would you be against WWII films or Vietnam oral histories? I don't diminish the pain this may cause for some families, but in the long run I believe the free flow of information will be better for us and future generations. I want people to know the human horror of this event. It makes it personal in a way that numbers and distant tv images just can't. This was a human tragedy and these transcripts help illuminate the humanity of those caught by history. __________________ To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers

08-29-2003, 08:11 AM	#3
oykib College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000	I agree with you, HB. If you're not a family member, then you shouldn't have access. There is no public good to be served by releasing them. It reminds me of a sitution from some years ago. Willim Shatner's wife was drowning in their pool and he can't swim. He made a frntic call to 911 and it ired on the local news. That event really disgusted me. The news program had pulled one of those "Star Trek character death teasers" instead of giving a real preview of what was to come. It was one of the events that made me stop watching mainstream news media regularly.

08-29-2003, 06:04 PM	#8
Buccaneer Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Colorado	You guys should have seen the 9/11 exhibit at the Smithsonian Musuem of American History. That was something to actually see and hear the events via recordings, videos and news casts.

08-29-2003, 07:26 PM	#10
Buccaneer Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Colorado	Not when you got a sensational story to tell.

08-29-2003, 10:48 PM	#14
sianews Mascot Join Date: Jun 2001	We shouldn't release them?? They should be read aloud on TV - daily, along with video. Americans cannot be allowed to forget what that day was like. Sadly I feel many already have .

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)