September 11, 2016 | David F. Coppedge

Big Science's Distorted View of 9/11

America’s leading science journal is out of touch with most Americans when it comes to remembering what happened on 9/11/01.

In its Sept. 2 issue, Science, the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), published a book review by Sue Black, a forensic scientist from Scotland, titled “Remembering 9/11.” She reviews a new book by Jay D. Aronson, Who Owns the Dead? The Science and Politics of Death at Ground Zero (Harvard University Press, 2016).

Black begins with some noble (and notably non-Darwinian) sentiments:

There is no dispute that the terrorist events that unfolded in the United States on 11 September 2001 changed western history forever. Governments debated how they would have responded had it happened on their home soil, aviation authorities reconsidered security, emergency services reassessed practices, and parents hugged their children tighter. Those of us in other countries willed Americans to rise above the senseless brutality and steadfastly defy the insult with patriotism, empathy, unity, and resilience.

Most of her review (and apparently of Aronson’s book) deals with the unfortunate infighting between stakeholders in the aftermath of the incident. According to her description, the book is a “nonjudgmental chronicle” of the “contentious issues that emerged in the aftermath of 9/11.”

What is completely absent is the who behind the it that happened. True, she identifies the “events” as “terrorist events,” but the terrorists have no faces. The events “unfolded.” She says “it happened” somewhere in western history. Black shares some of the American “patriotism, empathy, unity, and resilience” of the Americans across the pond, but whatever “senseless brutality” that “happened” seems as impersonal as a volcanic eruption or an earthquake.

It is extremely challenging to write a text and show no favoritism, but Aronson succeeds incredibly well, encouraging readers to come to their own conclusions. He masterfully chronicles the bitter debate between those who “gave” their lives and those who “lost” their lives, those who lived in Manhattan and those who died in Manhattan, those who lost family members and those who wished to rebuild a city.

That the grief of the day led, for some, to a legacy of continued pain is deeply saddening.

The faces depicted are upset, angry, and grieving Americans from various factions. But who gave their lives, if not the heroic NYFD firefighters? Why does Black put “gave” in quotes? Did they give their lives or not, running upstairs with heavy gear at high risk of impending death, to save their fellow Americans?

More importantly, who “took” those lives? The shadowy perpetrators of the senseless brutality, grief, and pain are never mentioned.

OK, so let’s mention them: “radical Islamic terrorists.” Why can’t leftists say those simple words? The 19 perpetrators, aided by the Saudi government and evil masterminds overseas like Osama bin Laden were motivated by an evil religion that glorifies death and falsely promises sexual bliss to lusty men who die in their jihad. The evil religion celebrates those who kill as many as possible as they go out in a burst of flames.

Say it, Science! Your book review points fingers of blame at some Americans who couldn’t handle their grief properly instead of focusing moral outrage at the evil worldview that caused the grief and still celebrates the destruction. Black mentions “patriotism” in passing but names no heroes. “Parents hugged their children tighter.” Oh please; spare us the vapid sentimentality.

Your book review completely ignores the faces of the jihadis and their motivations. It fails to mention the ongoing attacks around the world ever since 9/11—Paris, Brussels, San Bernardino, Orlando. It fails to mention the horrors of Islamic war and genocide, where Muslim fanatics invent ways to inflict the most pain and death, even dipping their enemies in vats of acid or boiling oil, dropping them in cages underwater, beheading Christians just for being Christians, kidnapping little girls for torture in rape rooms, wrapping suicide bombs on little boys and sending them into crowded restaurants.

Here’s the reason scientific materialists and other leftists refuse to finger Islam: they cannot bring themselves to call anything EVIL. Ideas don’t have consequences; events just happen. 9/11 was just an “insult,” like one monkey stealing another monkey’s fruit. The brutality is senseless, just like everything in Darwin’s universe. Like Stephen Weinberg famously quipped, “The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it seems pointless.” So what’s the point of writing a book review at all? Stuff happens.

AAAS editors, you really need to get out more. Here’s the way patriotic Americans go about “Remembering 9/11.” Call evil evil, and call good good. Identify the enemy. Be relentless in fighting evil. Celebrate courage and righteousness. Teach that ideas have consequences. Oppose false religions like radical Islam and immoral systems like communism. Teach children about the true and loving God of justice, grace, and peace. Build defenses to prevent further evil, going on offense if need be. Shout “Never again!” Help those who suffer. Overcome hate with love. Shine a light in the darkness. Sing God Bless America.

Conscientious Americans and international friends of Americans may find better remembrance in Ray Stevens’ new music video, “Dear America” on YouTube.

(Visited 36 times, 1 visits today)

Comments

  • SirWilhelm says:

    The Left is in a de facto alliance with Islam. It’a a natural alliance, because the Right is their natural enemy, because it is diametrically opposed to their ideologies, which must be imposed by totalitarianism. Leftists are careful not to offend their allies, lest they turn their radicals, their fighters, on them. In the meantime, the fighters, what we call “radical Islamists” do the dirty work for all of them trying to impose their will on the West, and all non-Muslims, and non-Leftists. Lies and deception, come naturally to the Left and Islam, and are condoned by both as the means justify the ends. Both of them take the long view, that they will be victorious, eventually, no matter how long it takes. They count on us having a lack of patience, and short memories, which is why this article lacks the specifics you criticize it for. The saddest part, is how thoroughly they have infiltrated the West, and how weak it is, as a result. Only God can save us.

  • TasWalker says:

    I think the term “radical Islamic terrorists” is also misleading. It’s better, but it is another term that white-washes the reality. Why not “Muslims”?

  • Feitsma says:

    Islam and (left or right) securalism are the same. Look at Iran. the left and the Islamists battled the sjah. After the ayatollahs won, the securalists were destroyed. Why? Because the lord of this world likes to kill people. Islamists do too. (Left also when you look at the atheistic regimes of Mao/Hitler and Stalin)

    Sorry for my bad English. I hope you get what I mean.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.