9/11 Survivors Should Stop Moaning

New Times ^ | Sept. 5, 2002 | Jill Stewart

[Not now, Not ever!]

Oh I don't know, if only one plane had hit, the damage would have been radically different.

[sweetliberty]

"And I'm also hoping that if people don't need the money, they won't take it."

It is my understanding that many didn't.

[hoosierskypilot]

It's human nature. When someone's relation dies tragically (is there any other kind?) it's like the survivors have hit the lotto: Everybody's looking for a payoff.

Can't blame them, really. It's a sign of the times. Money is the measure of worth in America. Morals, values, ethics, manners, spirituality, etc., are archaic notions.
You're nobody without money.

It's the worst in California. A friend of mine went to San Francisco from Tennessee. He's walking down the street and a guy pulls a gun and says, "Give me your money or I'll blow your brains out." My friend says, "Fine. Blow my brains out." The robber says, "Why would you want me to blow your brains out?" My friend says, "Because, I learned that, in California, you don't need brains, but you can't live without money."

[Just another Joe]

"Because, I learned that, in California, you don't need brains, but you can't live without money."

Ain't it the truth.
If you've got brains AND money, you just don't want to live in Kalifornia.

[Fearless Flyers]

I think a lot of people here are underestimating the American public’s power to forget. Most members of Free Republic have pretty good memories, but let me to try to refresh a few.

The American people had a choice of who’s cry to listen to after 911.

There was the lady who said “I didn’t send my son off to go to war that morning, I sent him to work”. The fact this women was still sending her adult son to work didn’t bother anyone and her’s was the popular quote directly after 911.

I’m thankful Lisa Beamer has step forward to keep the memories fresh in the public’s mind.Maybe you didn’t notice but it was her interviews that silenced the liberal crybabies in the media singing “we sent them to work not to war”.

Lisa Beamer is a real “Let’s Roll” type of babe, who believes in conservative values.

The American capacity to remember is not what most of the people on this thread believe it to be.

I don’t think any us of would prefer hearing the chant
“ We Sent Them To Work Not To War”
and I believe the minute the media silences Mrs. Beamer that is what we will be hearing.

So I say

Three Cheers for THE “LETS ROLL” BABE!!! Lisa Beamer

[Humidston]

I suspect back in the good old days when real men led, the sentiment would be "Let's get the hell out there and get those ####'s!"

...Such as occurred after Pearl Harbor.

Alas, today our country is filled with the whining feminization of our collective psyche.

Why is it that we "girls" have to gather round and psychoanalyze all our hurt feelings all the time? We squat over our pain, poke it with sticks and roll it around in the dust, discussing it ad nauseum.

I'm a girl and I don't like it one bit. It's time for all of us to stand up, roll up our sleeves and get busy kicking some Islamist fanny!

(And pass some laws forbidding anyone from suing any entity whatsoever - as a result of terrorist attacks.)

[Prodigal Son]

I dont know, I never trust a columnist that used the word "jingoistic" to describe anything American.

Exactly. That tripped my switch right away.

Another point I didn't understand- she is criticizing the relatives for suing Saudi Arabia? I would say to that- hey, OJ Simpson didn't get put in jail but he was still held to account at least financially. If they can sue the Saudis- I say more power to 'em. Hell, I hope they wind up owning the oil wells.

[Humidston]

I agree. They can sue the Saudis!

[Dan Day]

This babe really thinks she has an insight when in fact what she has is the same old , same old muddled soft toothed liberal thinking that has been fashionable since the 1950's.

I'd like to remind the author (and some of the posters on this thread) that even if she were subjected to reminders of 9/11 every hour of every day for the next 100 years, the sum total of her irritation would not be a thousandth of the suffering endured by a single victim, a single family who lost a member, or a single survivor who has endured with crippling third-degree burns.

So maybe she might want to sit down, reflect on her good fortune, and STOP HER BLOODY SELFISH WHINING.

[Dave S]

However, the real question is, would the damage have been the same if only one plane had hit? Is the second his a separate attack? There are arguments to be made on both sides, but I see each crash as a discrete event. But for the second crash, the second tower would be standing.

Do you really believe that the 2nd tower would have remained standing if the second plane hadnt hit it. All of the other nearby buildings became structurally unsound and collapsed within a day of the attack.

[Dave S]

You are full of it. I guess you just can't stand that someone has a longer lever than you. I'm here to say that $100K a year isn't going to buy all of the dreams you planned or pay for the loss of a spouse by murdering Arabs. Your bottom line approach based on money is bullshit

A minimum of $100,000 a year is almost three times the median family income in this country and their money is tax free. Sorry but you are not going to get many sobs out of me for their financial condition. Most had insurance in addtion to the funds they are getting from the government and the charities.

As much as I hate paying welfare to the poor, I certainly hate the idea of paying welfare to the upper middle class. You seem to want to make a special class out of the victims similar to giving blacks and women special treatment under the law. So much for conservatism.

No money isnt enough. The victims have received all kinds of emotional as well as financial report during the past year and we are out wreaking retribution on those who made the attacks.

P.S. Why should American Taxpayers pay for their lifestyle? It was freaking Arabs that killed their spouses and children. If you want us to attack Saudi Arabia and take over their oil fields to pay off the debt fine with me but dont ask me to pay for someones dreams when I had nothing to do with their problem.

[Dave S]

So are you saying that the plane that hit the Pentagon was also included in the "one event" rule? Because that's what the argument is, one "wave," if you will, of planes. So it would have to include the PA and the DC planes.

No because the two targets were separated by hundreds of miles.

From my laymans perspective if the insured property was the World Trade Center complex then I say one event. If each building was insured separtely than two events, unless the owner can show that destruction of one tower would have lead to the destruction of the other. Remember all of the close in buildings collapsed from structural damage caused by the collapse of the two towers.

[Movemout]

You aren't paying attention to the point. You are off on a tangent. Please enjoy yourself when you get where you want to be.

[Dave S]

You aren't paying attention to the point. You are off on a tangent. Please enjoy yourself when you get where you want to be.

Please tell me oh enlightened one, what is the point? Then I will either agree or disagree or decide not to waste my time.

My only reason for being on this thread was to react to the idiot who questioned how anyone could be expected to live for the rest of their life off a couple million dollars.

If Mrs. Beamer wants to cheapen herself by trademarking "lets roll" which already was in common usage fine, thats her problem. But Im sick and tired of the victims sticking their hands out like they were owed something.

BTW, I am much more sympathetic to the survivors of those on flight 93 who fought back and prevented further tragedy and also the families of the firemen and police who died trying to save others.

One last thought to keep in mind. All the wife of an American Special Forces soildier in Afghanistan gets if her husband is killed is the face of his life insurance which is not much (believe its less than $100,000). Why is a bond brokers wife entitled to more just because her husband happened to be in the wrong spot.

[SarahW]

Its important to note that the insurance claim involves the entire complex of buildings, not just the two towers. Perhaps some of those buildings would have survived a single crash.

I think the second tower would have remained, although compromised to what extent I do not know.
If experts for insurance company are persuasive that no additional damage resulted from the second, discrete crash event that occurred, they I presume they will prevail. However, I doubt they will be able to argue that one crash would have caused the total destruction that occurred.

There is a case to be made for either position and this is exactly the sort of thing the courts are for.

[SarahW]

I think the controversy was people had donated money for them, and it was being withheld for other purposes.

The monies were collected to give relief to those "brokers widows" and other victims of the attacks.

If the money was not given to the victims and their families, then it was collected under false pretenses.

That said, we are free to give money to be used by the widows of soldiers, too. Nothing stops you from trying to make that happen. But money was raised for the victims and it should be distributed to them.

[Jeff Gordon]

You agree with her concept of Lisa Beamer cashing in on her husbands death?!

All the proceeds from the "Let's roll" memorabilia go into the Todd A. Beamer Foundation.

[Huck]

I saw two planes, didn't you?

Indeed. Anyway, when you have a 7 billion dollar insurance policy, I would say having your lawyers hash out the precise amount due is entirely reasonable. I would insist on it, flea-bitten writers be damned.

[Howlin]

Agreed.

I'll be thinking of you this week.

[Movemout]

"Please tell me oh enlightened one, what is the point?"

The point, oh less enlightened one, is that Lisa Beamer is entitled to do whatever she cares to in the aftermath of her husband's death. You, nor I, can control what she does to secure her future. I support the position that I hope she makes millions and millions of dollars as a result. You, on the other hand, are worried that she might be a beneficiary of a few of your tax dollars. The same kinds of tax dollars that routinely go to alcoholics, drug abusers, and general losers in life's lottery.

"One last thought to keep in mind. All the wife of an American Special Forces soildier in Afghanistan gets if her husband is killed is the face of his life insurance which is not much (believe its less than $100,000). Why is a bond brokers wife entitled to more just because her husband happened to be in the wrong spot. "

Mike Spann died in deplorable circumstances as well. So has every armed soldier since the advent of the Islamakazis. You might be heartened to know that Sean Hannity took it upon himself to appeal to his listeners after the relevation of Mrs Spann's limited financial options. I think her plight has been well assuaged with donations from many a listener, not because of pity but because of respect.

My only reason for being on this thread was to react to the idiot who questioned how anyone could be expected to live for the rest of their life off a couple million dollars. "My only reason for being on this thread was to react to the idiot who questioned how anyone could be expected to live for the rest of their life off a couple million dollars. "

I was that idiot. I have raised four children and am contributing resources to two twin grandsons. I have earned at least that amount in the last ten years and I am nowhere near rich. If I kept my largesse from my family who needs help then maybe I would live higher on the hog. But, you see, I do not.