I worked with someone who was killed n 9/11. Not a close friend, but more than a mere acquaintance. Does that give me some special privilege for deciding on the memorial architecture or deciding who uses the images of 9/11 in free political speech? I don't think so.
If Al Quada had sent one terrorist over to NYC on 9/11 to murder one person on a street corner - and the assailant was prosecuted, it would be The State of New York vs. [fill in the blank - name of terrorist]. It is the state which prosecutes criminal acts on behalf of all of the population. An attack the magnitude of 9/11 was an attack on our nation as a whole. While the families deserve and have received our sympathy and support - they are not elevated to a special position by that victim hood to determine things like national security policy or strategic decisions about the war on terrorism. It is a matter for the entire country to evaluate and debate and decide, through our elected representatives and officials. As such, issues in the aftermath of 9/11 and symbolized by some subdued glimpse of 9/11 in a commercial are not beyond propriety.
I'd like to know if Democratic party operatives or Kerry campaign staff were working the phones last night after the release of the ads - ginning up reaction from the firemen (already endorsers of Kerry) and the select widows and survivors who have commented so far. That is the politicization of 9/11 that we should be outraged about.
The sad thing is -- the Dems didn't even have to do anything. The media did all their dirty work for them, by ginning this up as a story, and interviewing only those who would support their anti-Bush point of view. Someone posted a Hardball transcript from last night, where Dem and Repub activists commented on the Bush ads. Not one of them mentioned anything about the 9/11 references, not even Steve McMahon, who worked for Dean! This tells me what a non-story this is.