There is panic and fear, and there is also emotional disengagement.
Is there another choice available?
― Michael Daddino, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
This might get you there better, if I'm thinking of
the same article.
― nabisco%%, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Or
here'another possible attack, in Europe, the Arabian Peninsula or the United States'
― Graham, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
For decades, conservatives have derided the welfare state, saying
that by making it utterly dependent on the government for even the
most basic human needs, infantilizes the public, trapping them in
perpetual conflictedness with need on the one hand and resentment in
the other. The National Security State does the same, though. We can
consider this latest spate of news as a cynical ploy on the part of
the Bush administration to distract the people from issue X, or a
heartbreakingly sincere effort to warn the American public. Either
way, we have no choice but to rely on the government for information
and security, even as it continually denies it can even provide
these things in any meaningful sense.
And there's nothing you can do, either. I can go about your business
in blissful ignorance, which is impossible not only given the
omnipresence of the media but also my temperment. Or I can go about
my life with something vaguely approaching normal, which avoiding
the trains during rush hour and staying away from Grand Central and
Penn Station and washing your hands after reading the mail* which
all might just be a bit silly if some nut flies an airplane into
Three Mile Island and renders the Eastern Seabord unihabitable for a
long long time. Or I could head for the hills, which is utterly
impractical, and anyway, I can't imagine living anything other than
a city life.
*Haven't done this since November, mind you.
It's not like the days during the threat of all-out nuclear war,
where, even though the stakes were considerably higher, you could
march, you could elect lefty leaders and shame the pro-war ones. But
there is no shaming a terrorist, especially one you can't see.
― Michael Daddino, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Mike, there are an infinite number of hypothetical terror scenarios and the only thing worrying about all of them will do is make you insane.
― Kris, Saturday, 18 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
Ever since 9/11, I have thought that Terry Gilliam's
Brazil has
in many ways come to life. I can't watch it any more for that reason,
but there is a perverse humor to found in considering where and who the
terrorists are and what the warnings are all about. Kris is on the
money -- the possibilities are endless in terms of considering what
could happen, but yet life goes on.
― Ned Raggett, Sunday, 19 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
I'm not sure if this is an official warning, so even if there was an
attack, you might not have enough information to fully conclude that
there was going to be an attack, if there was one... so don't worry,
trust the government because it knows, and there's a few months left
till the elections.
― I may not dress like Jacki O, but I do fuck men, Sunday, 19 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)
I assume you're talking about
this (the NYTimes link won't work for me)...jolly
convenient, eh?
― DG, Sunday, 19 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)