Do you remember 9/11? or would you rather not?

[TrackerNeil]

I am not saying it doesn't happen. It simply doesn't happen in the overblown way that is posited by some in this thread. Statistics bear that out.

 

I don't know what statistics you could cite that would prove that there was not a certain kind of hostility in the immediate post-911 US, and I honestly don't even think anything like that has been "overblown" in this thread. However, if you feel you have data to contradict what someone specific has said, please do specify the statement and then provide those data. The speaker will then have the chance to respond to something specific.

[Marcus Agrippa]

Meh, it's been 14 years and where people died- we still shape policy around something that happened a decade and a half ago. That in itself is dumb.

[Errant Bard]

we still shape policy around something that happened a decade and a half ago. That in itself is dumb.

Your government uses it as an excuse to shape that policy, taking into account that this was a symptom of a more global problem with middle east that continues to this day (with, for example, at random, ISIS and/or the migratory crisis in Europe). Why is this dumb, can you elaborate?

(I am of not denying that your government may consider most citizens imbecile sheeps easily swayed by hoghwash though. Also, your government is based on texts drafted more than two hundreds years ago, it's not about to consider a single decade significant for stuff that continues being relevant to them.)

[Greywolf2375]

I was at work and once it happened had one of the only active internet connections because of all of the traffic.  Two of the people I worked with people in the buildings - a boyfriend and a sister.  One of my fathers former students was on the plane from Boston.  We did find out later in the day that the boyfriend and sister were not actually in the buildings when they were hit but seeing what my friends went through and seeing how it impacted my father did leave a mark on me.  Now having a child I understand more the level of concern they had for their family.

 

That is more though from the worry/concern than the specific event.

 

I do remember that day though, just like I remember much of the day when the Challenger was lost.  I think that is because of the uniqueness of the event - I do not remember where I was or anything different about when the Columbia exploded on reentry even if I remember some of the imagery from it.

[NoneofYourBiz]

 

I don't know what statistics you could cite that would prove that there was not a certain kind of hostility in the immediate post-911 US, and I honestly don't even think anything like that has been "overblown" in this thread. However, if you feel you have data to contradict what someone specific has said, please do specify the statement and then provide those data. The speaker will then have the chance to respond to something specific.

 

You could look at hate crime statistics, like the ones in the article here:  http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/charleston-church-shooting/hate-crime-america-numbers-n81521

 

Summary:  most hate crime in the U.S. is motivated by race, not religion.   Of groups targeted for racial hate crimes, blacks far and away make up the largest percentage of victims.  From 1995 - 2012 they represent 54.5% of victims of racially motivated hate crimes, with whites coming in a distant second at 16.3%.  

 

Where religion is the motivator, from 1995 - 2000 Jews dominate the victim list at 78.6%, while Muslims come in at 2%.  From 2001 - 2012 Muslims do indeed see an over 10% increase to 12.1%, however Jews still are far more likely to be victimized, still coming in at 66%.  We can surmise that 9/11 and other post 9/11 events did inspire more religious targeting of Muslims, but it is still far more dangerous to be black or Jewish in the U.S. than it is to be "brown", whatever that means, or Muslim.

 

If the Sikh community is being particularly targeted, and I remember certainly there were some incidents immediately post 9/11, this is especially sad and appalling given that they aren't even Muslim. Not that being Muslim would make it ok, it just makes the perps look especially ignorant.

 

In my personal interactions, I find people more curious than anything else.  You take opportunities to educate people on their misconceptions and answer their questions and act like the normal person you are and you don't usually have any issues.  If you shoot people or post death threats and engage in annihilation rhetoric, it generally makes you unlikable no matter what color or creed you are.  There are some people who are steeped in irrational hatred that you aren't ever going to reach, and we can only hope to find them before they act.

[Quoth]

I remember it vividly and always will. I have, over the last few years, paid less attention to the memorial services. I started to sympathize with some of the families who voiced the opinion that every year the memorial services force them to relive the horror. But this year, again, the reading of the names hit me. I wish we could make the present and future warped extremists, understand that here we are, 14 years after the fact, taking a few moments of our lives to reflect and recall those lost in these criminal attacks. But, conversely, when they are ultimately killed in the insane terrorist "Jhiad"  they unleash, no one... no state... no society... no people... will care, will even think to even pause to mention their names.

[NoneofYourBiz]

I do remember that day though, just like I remember much of the day when the Challenger was lost.  I think that is because of the uniqueness of the event - I do not remember where I was or anything different about when the Columbia exploded on reentry even if I remember some of the imagery from it.

 

I do remember where I was when during the Challenger and Columbia incidents, hell, I even remember where I was when I heard the news Princess Diana had died.  

 

However, I think this supposed personalization of 9/11 comes not from the fact that it was more tragic than other tragedies (and I don't even know why we would have to rate tragedy on a scale), but because it was an attack on Americans, on American soil.  Many Americans felt their bubble of security shattered, and since generic Americans were targeted, generic Americans felt vulnerable and it felt personal, in the same way that a black person would personalize the SC church shooting perhaps more than a white person would, or a Jew would personalize the Holocaust.  It doesn't mean everyone doesn't find those incidents horrific, it just feels more personal when you are personally a part of the demographic being targeted.  

 

Natural disasters are different.  Katrina I would imagine is personalized by people who experienced it, but not by those unaffected.  

[NoneofYourBiz]

 

 

 

I'm no statistician, but one group being the target of the most hate crimes does not necessarily mean it is more dangerous to be part of that group. Surely the ratio of demographic population:% of total being targeted indicates whether or not it is more dangerous to be part of that group? 

 

I.e. in a group of 10 white Americans and 2 Iranian Muslims, if 3 white people are victim of a hate crime and both Iranian muslims are, relatively speaking isn't it more dangerous to be an Iranian Muslim with a 100% chance of being targeted? I'm not saying that's the case in the US - just that I'd like to know if it is.

 

Also, as pointed out before, there are many hate crimes not committed against Muslims that are motivated by Islamophobia, purely because the criminal didn't know/care about the difference between a Muslim and a man from the Middle East or India. Any analysis of statistics should reflect that. 

 

I understand your point but it doesn't take away from the fact that most hate crimes are racially motivated and not religiously motivated, and religious motivated hate crimes are far and away perpetuated against Jews.  

 

Yes, if 10 Muslims live in the U.S. and 10 of them are targeted, then statistically they are 100% likely to be targeted.   We could look at population demographics and what not but I don't think that takes away from the fact that most hate crimes target blacks and Jews, both of whom are minorities in this country. This is not too surprising considering that a large portion of hate groups in the US are of the white supremacy type.

 

Edited to add:  a quick demographic search gives me 1.9% identifying as Jews and .9% as Muslim.  So almost twice the number of Jews as Muslims, but more far more than twice the percentage of hate crimes leveled at them. 

[serdog]

 

 

 

I'm no statistician, but one group being the target of the most hate crimes does not necessarily mean it is more dangerous to be part of that group. Surely the ratio of demographic population:% of total being targeted indicates whether or not it is more dangerous to be part of that group? 

 

Also the other question I would have is there a overlap with the race category ie attack on "Arabs" would fall in to race but it may still be link to islamapobia  

[DireWolfSpirit]

Two very heinous hate crimes against Sikhs that made me cringe to no end, were the guy blown away while pumping gas in Texas just because of his Turban and the mass shooting at a temple in the upper midwest. I think the ignorant attackers were spewing about 9/11. I get embarrassed that those fuckers ( the perps) are even citizens of the same country as me. I mean most American Sikhs are right up there on scale with Jain Buddhists or Baha'i faith as very peace loving overall.

That seed of intolerance is one of the tragedies of 9/11 that scars the nations fabric.

[NoneofYourBiz]

Also the other question I would have is there a overlap with the race category ie attack on "Arabs" would fall in to race but it may still be link to islamapobia  

 

That one is hard to answer, since in the FBI report there is no breakout for Arab or Middle Eastern.  The breakouts are as follows:

 

 

"The racial categories have remained quite constant in share of incidents, aside from a sharp drop in anti-Asian incidents. For the latest year, the share of racial/ethnic incidents is: anti-black, 52 percent; anti-white, 19 percent; anti-Hispanic, 11 percent; anti-other ethnicity, 8 percent; anti-multiple races, 3 percent; anti-Asian, 3 percent; anti-American Indian, 3 percent."

 

Where do Arabs fall in this breakout?  White?  Other ethnicity?  I have no idea, there is no Middle Eastern category and thankfully no "brown" category.  

 

The whole thing doesn't really work anyway...you'd have to do the same for any other religious denomination...how many white victims were also Christian or Jewish, how many black victims were also Christian or Muslim or Jewish, etc. I would guess they sort hate crimes based on what they know the person was targeted for.  

 

Also, is no one bothered at all by the tremendously high percentage of incidents against Jews?

[TrackerNeil]

 

You could look at hate crime statistics, like the ones in the article here:  http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/charleston-church-shooting/hate-crime-america-numbers-n81521

 

Summary:  most hate crime in the U.S. is motivated by race, not religion.   Of groups targeted for racial hate crimes, blacks far and away make up the largest percentage of victims.  From 1995 - 2012 they represent 54.5% of victims of racially motivated hate crimes, with whites coming in a distant second at 16.3%.  

 

What many Arab-looking people report in this post 9-11 America are not necessarily hate crimes but microaggressions, which are presumably not reported to authorities because, well, microaggressions are not crimes. It's not illegal to forbid your children to associate with Muslims or to view anyone who wears certain garb as suspicious, and these are just the sorts of things Muslim-appearing Americans report. I don't think these statistics speak to that.

[NoneofYourBiz]

 
What many Arab-looking people report in this post 9-11 America are not necessarily hate crimes but microaggressions, which are presumably not reported to authorities because, well, microaggressions are not crimes. It's not illegal to forbid your children to associate with Muslims or to view anyone who wears certain garb as suspicious, and these are just the sorts of things Muslim-appearing Americans report. I don't think these statistics speak to that.

 
Microaggressions occur to all sorts of people.  How can you measure this? It's anecdotal.

[Arkhangel]

Again, there is a difference between remembering and memorialising. No one is suggesting that other people have mysterious blank spots in their memory during other tragedies. What I'm saying is that there is a higher degree of personalisation in the way in which Americans often commemorate 9/11, not that there's anything weird about their actual literal individual memories.

[TrackerNeil]

 
Microaggressions occur to all sorts of people.  How can you measure this? It's anecdotal.

 

You just made my point, which was that when people share their experiences to me, I believe them. So I am pleased you've come around.

[Tears of Lys]

I remember it vividly and always will. I have, over the last few years, paid less attention to the memorial services. I started to sympathize with some of the families who voiced the opinion that every year the memorial services force them to relive the horror. But this year, again, the reading of the names hit me. I wish we could make the present and future warped extremists, understand that here we are, 14 years after the fact, taking a few moments of our lives to reflect and recall those lost in these criminal attacks. But, conversely, when they are ultimately killed in the insane terrorist "Jhiad"  they unleash, no one... no state... no society... no people... will care, will even think to even pause to mention their names.

This post really resonates with me. When I started the thread, I was doing some channel surfing and came across a replay of all the moment-to-moment TV coverage of this disaster and I found myself wishing they'd leave it alone. Not that I want to "forget" the loss of lives and the way America has reacted since this calamity, but the replays just made me feel what I felt then all over again.

I should have just taken a moment to ponder man's inhumanity to man and then changed the channel.

[NoneofYourBiz]

 

You just made my point, which was that when people share their experiences to me, I believe them. So I am pleased you've come around.

 

I've come around to understanding that you find anecdotal evidence that "you've heard" more relevant than a personal account and statistical evidence. 

[TrackerNeil]

 

I've come around to understanding that you find anecdotal evidence that "you've heard" more relevant than a personal account and statistical evidence. 

 

Keep coming around, then, because you're still not getting it. I said that the statistics you provided were not relevant because much of what we hear about are not hate crimes but microaggressions. You provided stats on hate crimes and only hate crimes. See the difference? 

[TheReal_Rebel]

Why don't you ask George.

As someone who grew up in and around the area what do you think he'd say?

Anyone who doesn't want to remember is either too traumatized or doesn't live in U.S.

[NoneofYourBiz]

 
Keep coming around, then, because you're still not getting it. I said that the statistics you provided were not relevant because much of what we hear about are not hate crimes but microaggressions. You provided stats on hate crimes and only hate crimes. See the difference? 

I see the difference is that facts don't support your narrative, and they do mine. So for you they are not relevant, because feelings, I guess. Microagressions, for the love of God. Everyone encounters microaggressions. If microaggressions upset you that much you probably need a thicker skin. But then I guess the whole idea behind microaggressions is to promote perpetual feelings of being victimized.

You can't be the thought police, you can't make everyone like each other. Microaggressions as you said, are not against the law. You can't police them. You have nothing to support your opinion but immeasureable supposed microaggressions, while I give stats on measurable actual crimes, but somehow, you think you really got me because your statement is unprovable.