9/11 and American Exceptionalism

[GuineaPig]

I didn't want to put this post in the GD thread, because I knew it would just generate a shitstorm.  But it's something I've thought about for a long time, and this is as good a time as any to bring it up.

About 3,000 people died on September 11th, 2001.  With the host of related medical problems from people at the scene of the attacks, the number of direct deaths related to it has risen, and will continue to rise, but I doubt it will exceed 10,000. 

My point is that I'm a little baffled as to why September 11th is treated as this massive calamity, both in the United States, and around the world.  Over 300,000 people died in the Haiti earthquake.  Over 200,000 people died as a result of the December 26th tsunami in 2004.  Malaria kills nearly a million people each year.  Millions of people are starving in East Africa due to drought right now.

I understand the context is different, and that natural disasters are different from calculated attacks against civilians.  But over 100,000 civilians have been killed in the Iraq War, something the United States has had a direct hand in starting, and no American politicians are exactly bemoaning that.  Meanwhile, there has been civil war in Sudan and Somalia, conflicts in Chad, the Congo, Chechnya, Burundi, etc.  And 9/11 doesn't even register in the top 100 for atrocities committed in the last 50 years, let alone if we extend past that.  Nevertheless, you can guarantee that another 100 years down the line, people will remember 9/11 more than the Khmer Rouge.

I should note that this isn't exactly unprecedented in history.  People remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki more than Tokyo, or Dresden than Hamburg.  People in the West learn a lot more about the Holocaust than the Second Sino-Japanese War.

I guess what I'm getting at is that I ultimately view 9/11 more as a historical event than a "tragedy."  While I understand that the context of the attacks differs from many of the things I've mentioned here, I don't think the amount of death and destruction merited the national and international attention of it, let alone the military response to it.  Basically, I think the response to it is a manifestation of American exceptionalism; that the lives of Americans inherently have greater value than the citizens of other countries. 

Thoughts?

[73109]

I completely agree. It's just about the different perspectives of learning about history. American's are American oriented and selfish.

[Tick]

I completely agree. It's just about the different perspectives of learning about history. American's are American oriented and selfish.

All people have a tendency to be selfish and self centered, not just Americans. I think every country and culture has similar tendencies.

[Tick]

Also, I want to say, I'm not much in the mood to debate any merits of the OP today. As an American living in Connecticut, I have deep feelings about 9/11. Its emotional for me. I'll leave it at that.

[73109]

I completely agree. It's just about the different perspectives of learning about history. American's are American oriented and selfish.

All people have a tendency to be selfish and self centered, not just Americans. I think every country and culture has similar tendencies.

I understand that, but the reason I just said Americans is due to the fact that this thread is about an American "tragedy." I understand that 9/11 was a blow on America, but I feel that our nation needs to be more educated about other instances of events like this because we really are incredibly ignorant of the goings on of others, which leads to the extreme reverence of days like these. I don't think there was an anniversary rememberence day for Haiti, and that was over 100 times worse. Also, if there was, which there could have been, I doubt we will be giving a shit in 10 years and starting a memorial.

edit: Another example comparing apples to apples. Hurricane Katrina vs. the Earthquake in Haiti. We obviously give much more reverence to one that happened on American soil despite its death toll being 99 percent less than that of the earthquake in Haiti.

[Gadough]

Question: Is 9/11 viewed as a massive tragedy outside of the United States? It's likely we put a greater emphasis on it because it happened to us. Perhaps people in other parts of the world don't place as much emphasis on it?

[SnakeEyes]

I understand the context is different, and that natural disasters are different from calculated attacks against civilians.

Okay.  So, you asked the question, then answered it in the next paragraph.  If you understand this, why did you use natural disasters as examples to make your point?  Of course natural disasters are terrible - just remember that the U.S. gives billions in aid when that happens (you didn't mention that for some reason).  When that Haiti earthquake happened, it was all over the news for months.  Same with the tsunami. 
 

But over 100,000 civilians have been killed in the Iraq War, something the United States has had a direct hand in starting

No, we didn't.  The U.S. didn't give suicide vests to foreign terrorists (foreigners to Iraq, that is) or rocket launchers to terrorists and tell them to blow up civilians eating lunch or shopping or enjoying a day at the park or driving down the street, etc.  These people were (and, are) extremists who didn't want to see democracy taking place in that country.  But, there were a couple of major problems:  1) most of them weren't even Iraqi, so they had no say to begin with; 2) the majority of Iraqis WELCOMED democracy and took part in it.  So, for you to say that, "the U.S. had a direct hand in 100,000 people getting killed" is ignorant, disingenuous, over-simplistic and pretty much just absurd.

[Tick]

I completely agree. It's just about the different perspectives of learning about history. American's are American oriented and selfish.

All people have a tendency to be selfish and self centered, not just Americans. I think every country and culture has similar tendencies.

I understand that, but the reason I just said Americans is due to the fact that this thread is about an American "tragedy." I understand that 9/11 was a blow on America, but I feel that our nation needs to be more educated about other instances of events like this because we really are incredibly ignorant of the goings on of others, which leads to the extreme reverence of days like these. I don't think there was an anniversary rememberence day for Haiti, and that was over 100 times worse. Also, if there was, which there could have been, I doubt we will be giving a shit in 10 years and starting a memorial.

Try to also realize that there are many great Americans who give of themselves unselfishly to help the unfortunate in the world. They are out there and many go unsung. A woman who I know very well have given the past 20 years of her life running an orphanage in Ghana.
Also, Americans reached out big time and gave with there hearts to the victims of Haiti. Many Americans gave unselfishly, there time, and money to help the people there.
A hurricane is not the same as a terrorist attack. People will not remember an act of nature 10 years later in the same fashion. Some however will still be giving of themselves to help that country rebuild 10 years from now.

[antigoon]

I understand the context is different, and that natural disasters are different from calculated attacks against civilians.

Okay.  So, you asked the question, then answered it in the next paragraph.  If you understand this, why did you use natural disasters as examples to make your point?  Of course natural disasters are terrible - just remember that the U.S. gives billions in aid when that happens (you didn't mention that for some reason).  When that Haiti earthquake happened, it was all over the news for months.  Same with the tsunami. 
 

But over 100,000 civilians have been killed in the Iraq War, something the United States has had a direct hand in starting

No, we didn't.  The U.S. didn't give suicide vests to foreign terrorists (foreigners to Iraq, that is) or rocket launchers to terrorists and tell them to blow up civilians eating lunch or shopping or enjoying a day at the park or driving down the street, etc.  These people were (and, are) extremists who didn't want to see democracy taking place in that country.  But, there were a couple of major problems:  1) most of them weren't even Iraqi, so they had no say to begin with; 2) the majority of Iraqis WELCOMED democracy and took part in it.  So, for you to say that, "the U.S. had a direct hand in 100,000 people getting killed" is ignorant, disingenuous, over-simplistic and pretty much just absurd.

When you start a war, you are AT LEAST partially responsible for all the horrible things that come from it. And that's being very generous in this case.

[Sigz]

Not to mention the 10,000+ civilians which were killed by coalition forces.

[Perpetual Change]

Watched a documentary on 9/11 today with a friend from Pakistan and another from Nigeria. Was real interesting, to say the least. Basically, they where making anti-American quips 30 seconds, even about people just talking about how the lost a friend in the attacks and whatnot, which was too much for me to handle.

But, you know, I can't help agreeing with one thing about all that. The biggest tragedy of all about 9/11 is not that all those people died. It's that all those people died and we as a nation, ten years later, have still given serious consideration as to why.

Ten years and pointless cowboying around the Middle East later,  I can't help but feeling like the 9/11 story has finally completed it's full evolution into a Hollywood movie. Any meaning the day may have had for me has been drowned out in endless hollywood sentiment and a refusal to actually approach the tradegy in any real critical-thinking or enlightened capacity.

[El Barto]

No, we didn't.  The U.S. didn't give suicide vests to foreign terrorists (foreigners to Iraq, that is) or rocket launchers to terrorists and tell them to blow up civilians eating lunch or shopping or enjoying a day at the park or driving down the street, etc.  These people were (and, are) extremists who didn't want to see democracy taking place in that country.  But, there were a couple of major problems:  1) most of them weren't even Iraqi, so they had no say to begin with; 2) the majority of Iraqis WELCOMED democracy and took part in it.  So, for you to say that, "the U.S. had a direct hand in 100,000 people getting killed" is ignorant, disingenuous, over-simplistic and pretty much just absurd.

Ye Gods!


As for the OP,  I suppose it's human nature to appreciate those more related to you than others.  Personally,  I've never gotten it.  I don't understand what makes an American death more horrible than the death of a starving African, but it is and that's that.  I'm sure the Africans would feel the same way. 

[Tick]

No, we didn't.  The U.S. didn't give suicide vests to foreign terrorists (foreigners to Iraq, that is) or rocket launchers to terrorists and tell them to blow up civilians eating lunch or shopping or enjoying a day at the park or driving down the street, etc.  These people were (and, are) extremists who didn't want to see democracy taking place in that country.  But, there were a couple of major problems:  1) most of them weren't even Iraqi, so they had no say to begin with; 2) the majority of Iraqis WELCOMED democracy and took part in it.  So, for you to say that, "the U.S. had a direct hand in 100,000 people getting killed" is ignorant, disingenuous, over-simplistic and pretty much just absurd.

Ye Gods!


As for the OP,  I suppose it's human nature to appreciate those more related to you than others.  Personally,  I've never gotten it.  I don't understand what makes an American death more horrible than the death of a starving African, but it is and that's that.  I'm sure the Africans would feel the same way.

How do you equate 9/11 to staving Africans? There are plenty of staving Americans that most Americans don't give two shits about. People are desensitized to such issues. How many homeless roam the streets of America everyday? Its seen as a cold stark reality, that as I say, people desensitize themselves to so they can  selfishly go about buying apps for there I Phones, and keep enjoying the world that revolves around themselves. Sad but true.
I am guilty myself in sooo many ways.

[Ben_Jamin]

Well, if you want terrorism, look at how America was founded. Trying to demolish the Natives way of life, to conform to the American way, in any way possible. That is terrorism to its fullest.

[hefdaddy42]

There is a large difference between a natural disaster and a terrorist atrocity.

[GuineaPig]

There is a large difference between a natural disaster and a terrorist atrocity.

I don't disagree.

But at what point does the death toll of a natural disaster become more tragic than a man-made one?  5 times? 10 times? 100 times?

And how do the deaths of non-Americans scale to the deaths of Americans?

[antigoon]

To address the OP, I think a big part of it is how the attacks happened. Multiple passenger jet airlines were hijacked and flown into two of the tallest, most famous buildings in the world. It could have been straight out of an action flick. The images were so visceral.

[Ben_Jamin]

Basically, its human nature. What's sad is the way people acted after, the division and seclusion of a people. The hate towards the innocent not involved is astounding, that just makes you exactly like them.

[Scheavo]

I don't think American exceptionalism plays into it, simply the human "us vs them" mentality that too many people never question. It's sick and wrong.

So, for you to say that, "the U.S. had a direct hand in 100,000 people getting killed" is ignorant, disingenuous, over-simplistic and pretty much just absurd.

Lol, someone imagining that the US isn't responsible for the aftermath of our actions is "ignorant, disingenuous, over simplistic and pretty much just absurd." You don't have to be intentionally doing something to be responsible, you're intentionally only matters in determining the punishment, not the responsibility.

[antigoon]

Ten years and pointless cowboying around the Middle East later,  I can't help but feeling like the 9/11 story has finally completed it's full evolution into a Hollywood movie. Any meaning the day may have had for me has been drowned out in endless hollywood sentiment and a refusal to actually approach the tradegy in any real critical-thinking or enlightened capacity.

Indeed.

I saw this article on Al Jazeera called, "Let's forget 9/11"

from the article:

Ask yourself this: ten years into the post-9/11 era, haven't we had enough of ourselves?  If we have any respect for history or humanity or decency left, isn't it time to rip the Band-Aid off the wound, to remove 9/11 from our collective consciousness?  No more invocations of those attacks to explain otherwise inexplicable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and our oh-so-global war on terror. No more invocations of 9/11 to keep the Pentagon and the national security state flooded with money. No more invocations of 9/11 to justify every encroachment on liberty, every new step in the surveillance of Americans, every advance in pat-downs and wand-downs and strip downs that keeps fear high and the homeland security state afloat.

The attacks of September 11, 2001 were in every sense abusive, horrific acts. And the saddest thing is that the victims of those suicidal monstrosities have been misused here ever since under the guise of pious remembrance. This country has become dependent on the dead of 9/11 - who have no way of defending themselves against how they have been used - as an all-purpose explanation for our own goodness and the horrors we've visited on others, for the many towers-worth of dead in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere whose blood is on our hands.

Isn't it finally time to go cold turkey? To let go of the dead? Why keep repeating our 9/11 mantra as if it were some kind of old-time religion, when we've proven that we, as a nation, can't handle it - and worse yet, that we don't deserve it?

We would have been better off consigning our memories of 9/11 to oblivion, forgetting it all if only we could. We can't, of course. But we could stop the anniversary remembrances. We could stop invoking 9/11 in every imaginable way so many years later. We could stop using it to make ourselves feel like a far better country than we are. We could, in short, leave the dead in peace and take a good, hard look at ourselves, the living, in the nearest mirror.

https://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011910125513799497.html

I think this is why today has been upsetting me. I couldn't quite put my finger on it but it explains why I've been getting a little upset today whenever I see people talking about "protecting our freedom" and proclaiming GOD BLESS AMERICA all over Facebook. I just can't use this day as an excuse to feel good about a country I have no business feeling good about. It feels so fake to me.

[hefdaddy42]

But at what point does the death toll of a natural disaster become more tragic than a man-made one?  5 times? 10 times? 100 times?

What do you mean "more tragic?"  I don't understand the dichotomy.  No matter how large a death toll is from from an earthquake, a hurricane, or a tsunami, they still remain natural disasters and as such unavoidable.  They can strike without warning at any time almost anywhere, and as such are part of the natural order of things.  The loss of life is no less tragic, but the events themselves aren't atrocities like terrorist attacks.

And how do the deaths of non-Americans scale to the deaths of Americans?

There is no difference objectively.  But it makes sense that the events of 9/11 would register more with Americans than anyone else, or any such event in Britain or Japan should register more with them.

[Scheavo]

But at what point does the death toll of a natural disaster become more tragic than a man-made one?  5 times? 10 times? 100 times?

What do you mean "more tragic?"  I don't understand the dichotomy.  No matter how large a death toll is from from an earthquake, a hurricane, or a tsunami, they still remain natural disasters and as such unavoidable.  They can strike without warning at any time almost anywhere, and as such are part of the natural order of things.  The loss of life is no less tragic, but the events themselves aren't atrocities like terrorist attacks.

I don't get how human actions aren't natural. It's natural to expect retaliation when you oppress people. It's natural for humans to fight each other, and to kill each other. War is the natural order of things. We "could" avoid natural disasters by living in different area's, building different housing, etc; perhaps the atrocity for something like Haiti is that the people lived in such poverty, and their housing was of such poor build, that so much was damaged, and so many people died.

[Implode]

Someone of FB was saying how he can't believe there are people who aren't flying an American flag today. Feel free to be patriotic, but putting other people down because they aren't...that's just...not good.

[TheOutlawXanadu]

I don't think we should forget 9/11, but like Englehardt said, we should stop using it to make ourselves feel like a better country than we are.

[jsem]

Not sure how on-topic this is, but I feel I need to address this anyway:

The worst part of about the 9/11 attacks is that the terrorists won by default after the overreaction of the western community. Especially the US.

If one accepts the notion that the motive of the terrorists was that we have freedoms and they don't like our way of living, then we should not surrender those freedoms for the reason of counter-terrorism - that is a win for the terrorist. However, the fact of the matter is that the real motive is the interventionism that has been going on for decades and decades.

What they want to do, is that they want to bring the U.S. and the western world to a collapse. Here is how it works: By injecting fear into the populous through terrorist attacks, this creates an uncertainty and a sense of insecurity - which in turn also leads to people accepting diminishing civil liberties for counter-terrorism purposes, even if it turns the justice system into mob rule. The fear can also lead to a revenge-seeking foreign policy with more interventions and increased spending - which hurts the economy.

Their ultimate goal isn't to kill as many Americans or westerners as possible. If that was their goal, they would most likely primarily be relying on biological warfare and not attacking transportation. The main reason is creating a climate where people fear the terrorists. Further occupation doesn't help, it only worsens the prognosis for further attacks.



To the OP:
American exceptionalism has nothing to do with 9/11. It did bring a mentality of Us vs. Them though, as previously mentioned in the thread. It's very harmful and has done the post-9/11 world little to no good. The reason it got so huge is because of the iconic twin towers falling had a deep psychological impact, it was a supposed message from the terrorists saying "we're here and we can attack you at any time" thus making people frightened. Terrorist attacks from jihadists hadn't happened in a similar fashion in the west before, so the phenomenon was rather new - thus the reaction.

[hefdaddy42]

But at what point does the death toll of a natural disaster become more tragic than a man-made one?  5 times? 10 times? 100 times?

What do you mean "more tragic?"  I don't understand the dichotomy.  No matter how large a death toll is from from an earthquake, a hurricane, or a tsunami, they still remain natural disasters and as such unavoidable.  They can strike without warning at any time almost anywhere, and as such are part of the natural order of things.  The loss of life is no less tragic, but the events themselves aren't atrocities like terrorist attacks.

I don't get how human actions aren't natural. It's natural to expect retaliation when you oppress people. It's natural for humans to fight each other, and to kill each other. War is the natural order of things. We "could" avoid natural disasters by living in different area's, building different housing, etc; perhaps the atrocity for something like Haiti is that the people lived in such poverty, and their housing was of such poor build, that so much was damaged, and so many people died.

The difference is that humans are free to choose their actions.  That's why an atrocity is different than a natural disaster. A hurricane doesn't choose to hit a populated area, it just happens.  And you can't avoid natural disasters by living in different areas; you just get different disasters to which you are potentially exposed.

[Fluffy Lothario]

Watched a documentary on 9/11 today with a friend from Pakistan and another from Nigeria. Was real interesting, to say the least. Basically, they where making anti-American quips 30 seconds, even about people just talking about how the lost a friend in the attacks and whatnot, which was too much for me to handle.

This really doesn't surprise me at all. In the last two years, I've had flatmates from Germany, Chile, Northern Ireland, Romania, China and Indonesia. All were interns at United Nations and DHL, so through them and my own friends, the range of nationalities I've come into contact with in recent times is huge. All these people befriend each other with no regard for nationality. I still remember a party where they were discussing one Thai intern who was anti-Chinese. Everyone was disgusted. And yet in all my experience, anti-American sentiment is almost universal.

And I'd say it has a lot to do with American exceptionalism (I dunno if this is a common phrase or if the OP just coined it, but it fits). Whether it is actually the case or not, and whether they like it or not, Americans come across as believing that American suffering and deaths are exceptionally tragic, American heroes are exceptionally heroic, American aid during wars, conflicts, and disasters is exceptionally significant and admirable, American culture is exceptional amongst world cultures, and so on, and God help you if you don't see it the same way.

I've gone far out of my way to avoid seeing any 9/11 commemorations this year because I dread what has been made of them. I'm all for letting people mourn those who died and suffered, but I don't think I could stand to sit through the latest episode in the "Feel Sad for Poor Wounded America and Feel Pride in How She Overcomes" Show.

[Scheavo]

But at what point does the death toll of a natural disaster become more tragic than a man-made one?  5 times? 10 times? 100 times?

What do you mean "more tragic?"  I don't understand the dichotomy.  No matter how large a death toll is from from an earthquake, a hurricane, or a tsunami, they still remain natural disasters and as such unavoidable.  They can strike without warning at any time almost anywhere, and as such are part of the natural order of things.  The loss of life is no less tragic, but the events themselves aren't atrocities like terrorist attacks.

I don't get how human actions aren't natural. It's natural to expect retaliation when you oppress people. It's natural for humans to fight each other, and to kill each other. War is the natural order of things. We "could" avoid natural disasters by living in different area's, building different housing, etc; perhaps the atrocity for something like Haiti is that the people lived in such poverty, and their housing was of such poor build, that so much was damaged, and so many people died.

The difference is that humans are free to choose their actions.  That's why an atrocity is different than a natural disaster. A hurricane doesn't choose to hit a populated area, it just happens.  And you can't avoid natural disasters by living in different areas; you just get different disasters to which you are potentially exposed.

You can certainly mitigate the (potential) damage done by them, and the amount to which you do this is dependent upon choice. The earth quake which hit japan was massive, yet the Earthquake itself wasn't a problem.

And so what if the act was voluntary? Some things should be expected, free will or not. If you go up an punch someone in the face, that person could freely choose to hug you... but do you honestly think that will happen? As a country, we've been pretty much doing this for at least 60 years now, and we're surprised when we get a punch to the face. 9/11, or something like it, was as natural as a bear shitting in the woods.

[Progmetty]

I don't think the vast majority of Americans think they're exceptional in an egotistical way. But they are aware that they are the center of the world's attention for so many reasons, some of which are America's doing and some aren't. Set aside that most of the media the world is exposed to is American and I mean just entertainment, not political matters.
If a roof collapses in a class at Harvard and kills some people it would certainly get more attention even if more people were killed the same way at community college in some little town. Which one will get national attention and therefore more sympathy just through the exposure to the story on the news? I understand where tick is coming from cause I don't expect the people at Harvard to be wondering "Why are we so upset when a worse incident happened there?" because all the givens resulted in them getting all the attention in the conclusion.
With all due respect to Michael Jackson; someone else must have died that same day. We all remember how the reaction was.

[El Barto]

And I'd say it has a lot to do with American exceptionalism (I dunno if this is a common phrase or if the OP just coined it, but it fits). Whether it is actually the case or not, and whether they like it or not, Americans come across as believing that American suffering and deaths are exceptionally tragic, American heroes are exceptionally heroic, American aid during wars, conflicts, and disasters is exceptionally significant and admirable, American culture is exceptional amongst world cultures, and so on, and God help you if you don't see it the same way.

I agree with this,  but I don't think it's any different than anybody else.  I'd bet that the people of Angola are just as gung-ho about Angolan stuff. 

[Sigz]

I don't even think it's just the nationality, but people care more about things that are closer to them - whether that's culturally or geographically.

[Super Dude]

It's really cool that when I clicked this thread, I happened to arrive at Prophets of War in my Systematic Chaos playthrough.

[Chino]

I think the reason why 9/11 hit Americans so hard was the element of surprise. We were not really at war with anyone. There wasn't really any indication that we were in danger. Had there been threats, or small events leading people to believe we were at risk, I don't think it would have been as big of a shock. Other countries with heavy casualties from attacks, usually have it in the back of their minds that it is a possiblitly. An attack like the ones on 9/11 were not even thought possible by most Americans. It wasnt just the attacks themselves, but the way they were carried out. Had a bomb been brought into the country, that would be one thing. But these attacks were carried out by people who used our schools to learn their dirty work. Got through what Americans thought was tight security. Took control over one of the hardest vehicles to stop. Then proceeded to slam them into the most iconic buildings in our country. Then the fact that a tradgedy happened, only to be repeated minutes later was very moving to some. Having the same attack happen twice and having double the destruction made it seem much more devistating than say if the emire state building was struck.

[Super Dude]

I mean we did have problems with Iraq all throughout the '90s. I know it's unrelated, but it's not like we *didn't* have people pissed off at us that we could expect something like that from.

[bosk1]

Personally, I don't see anything wrong or selfish about the general sentiment about 9/11 in this country.  Yes, there is a lot of focus on it, and more so than other recent events that have had a higher death toll.  But it's not about the numbers.  It's the fact that, (1) it is an event that happened to the United States, and (2) as Hef put it, it takes on a different light when it is not a natural disaster, but rather a terrorist atrocity.  I think point #2 has already been discussed adequately.  I want to focus on #1 for just a second.

To me, it's kinda like if a member of your own family is killed.  There are all kinds of tragedies all around us every day.  And we all feel for the victims of those tragedies to varying degrees.  But even if we just hear about a disaster killing thousands, it is perfectly natural to be more emotional and feel a greater impact when a tragedy happens to a member of our own family.  We have a bond with that person that makes that person's tragedy hit us a lot harder.  I see nothing wrong with that phenomenon on a national level either.  Yes, it truly is a tragedy when, for example, 300,000 people die in an earthquake in Haiti.  And that's why many have donated their time, money, and/or other resources to help.  But that still isn't going to hit most people as hard as when something happens to people in this country simply because we share a common bond with our own countrymen, even if it is more of a tenuous one, than we share with people outside our country.  Of course, that can be taken to extremes.  But there's nothing wrong with the fact that we share that bond and that, as a result, many of us take the 9/11 tragedy very seriously.  In fact, it saddens me that there are more and more people in this day and age who do NOT feel that bond and somehow think it is a negative thing for those of us that do.