New Yorkers pee themselves in fear

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
Jingles
New Yorkers pee themselves in fear

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/28/low.flying.plane/index.html]"There's a plane falling, there is a big aircraft falling like 9/11,"[/url]

Quote:
The YouTube video shows dozens of people standing in a parking lot, watching the plane approach. As it nears, they begin to run. Someone unleashes an expletive. "Run, run!" says one person. "Oh my God," cries another.

A 911 call released by the Hudson County Sheriff's Department in New Jersey shows the panic caused by the plane.

"There's a plane falling, there is a big aircraft falling like 9/11," a man says to the operator. "Everybody is running and people are crying and panicking."

My favorite part:

Quote:
Fran Townsend, who advised President George W. Bush for more than three years, called the move "crass insensitivity" in the wake of 9/11.

They pee themselves in fear, I pee myself laughing.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

CBC reported the White House apologised profusely. Will heads roll?

Cueball Cueball's picture

Where is the Youtube video of people freaking out?

Ahh here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emPWG9iK-10

One has to ask, where are they running too?

Michelle

I don't get the "funny" part.  People in NYC were traumatized by what happened on 9-11.  Where's the "funny"?

Cueball Cueball's picture

They have been traumatized by their own media.

Unionist

They ought to know by now that the U.S. mega-military-industrial-complex never conducts the same false flag operation twice in the same place. So planes near skyscrapers means: "We're safe!"

 

Michelle

Sure.  But many of them also actually lived through 9-11.  WE have been traumatized by the media about it.  THEY have been traumatized and affected by the real thing.

What would you think if you saw a low-flying plane where there wasn't usually one, flying low and erratically, followed closely by a fighter jet?

It was a supremely stupid move, and I don't blame people in the city for freaking out when they saw it.  Post-traumatic stress isn't "funny".

ElizaQ ElizaQ's picture

Thanks for saying all that Michelle. I agree with you.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Michelle wrote:

Sure.  But many of them also actually lived through 9-11.  WE have been traumatized by the media about it.  THEY have been traumatized and affected by the real thing.

What would you think if you saw a low-flying plane where there wasn't usually one, flying low and erratically, followed closely by a fighter jet?

I'd think I was in Iraq.

Ghislaine

Jingles wrote:

They pee themselves in fear, I pee myself laughing.

Do you have any empathy whatsoever for people who lived through a massacre of thousands and witnessed that event? People who lost co workers or family members? People who saw basically the same image coming at them from their office window? And all for a stupid [url=http://wcbstv.com/topstories/air.force.one.2.996457.html]
photo op [/url]
 
Quote:

 
Federal officials knew that sending two fighter jets and Air Force One to buzz ground zero and Lady Liberty might set off nightmarish fears of a 9/11 replay, but they still ordered the photo-op kept secret from the public.

In a memo obtained by CBS 2 HD the Federal Aviation Administration's James Johnston said the agency was aware of "the possibility of public concern regarding DOD (Department of Defense) aircraft flying at low altitudes" in an around New York City. But they demanded total secrecy from the NYPD, the Secret Service, the FBI and even the mayor's office and threatened federal sanctions if the secret got out.

martin dufresne

Hey, he said the Prez would be close to the people... if for a faux to-op!Wink

remind remind's picture

I agree PTSD is not funny, and seeing how New Yorkers reacted, I cannot imagine, the severity of PTSD amongst those who are the receiving end of the USA's foreign policies.

Ghislaine

remind wrote:

I agree PTSD is not funny, and seeing how New Yorkers reacted, I cannot imagine, the severity of PTSD amongst those who are the receiving end of the USA's foreign policies.

Well since this has turned into a competition about who is entitled to feel PTSD - perhaps we should mention the PTDS suffered by Saddam's victims?

Perhaps it should be mentioned as well that residents of NY consistently vote for those who opposed the war in Iraq. Does that fact entitle them to any sympathy and spare them from derision?

Michelle

I completely agree that Iraq is terrible and what they're doing in Iraq is terrible, and of course I think their plight is much worse than the momentary panic this incident caused in NYC.  That doesn't mean I can't also empathize with the average citizen of New York who lived through 9-11 and was frightened by this stupid flyover.  Murdering someone and chopping them up into little pieces is way worse than pounding the crap out of someone, but that doesn't mean you can't feel bad for an assault victim because murder victims have it way worse.

oldgoat

I agree with Michelle.  This is a noteworthy event because it was so incredibly insensitive and stupid, but there's certainly nothing funny about it. 

martin dufresne

I think the thread title is insensitive because it targetted the common people (your politics are showing, Jingles!) , but anti-govt humor is perfectly legitimate here. We should be wary of shying away from the power of sarcasm as a revolutionary tool to dissolve self-importance and ideological overkill.

Star Spangled C...

Agreed. Nothing funny about this at all. I mean, really, if you were walking through the streets of NYC and saw a 747 only 1000 above the ground, what the hell would you think?

And the White House didn't alert anyone (including the mayor) in advance that this would be happening. Incredibly, incredibly stupid.

I was watching the Daily Show last night and Jon Stewart asked rhetorically: if they wanted a photo of the plane in the city, wouldn't it be easier to jsut photoshop the damn thing?

Michelle

I have no problem with anti-government humour.  I'm not saying sarcasm isn't funny or okay - I do it all the time.  I just disagree with Jingles about it being funny that average New Yorkers were panicked by the flyover, that's all.

Caissa

I agree, Michelle.

Now if this thread was about the army shovelling snow in Tarana...

remind remind's picture

I agree completely Ghislaine and Michelle, however, I was struck by  how affected they still are with PTSD and thusly realized what the implications must be for others, who are still being directly impacted by that day. My comments reflected nothing else. I feel for them, as I said PTSD is no laughing matter.

 

Michelle

Ha!  Even Torontonians laugh about that, Caissa. :D

Ghislaine

lol - we definitely still joke about that Toronto storm here in the maritimes.....

Unionist

Caissa wrote:

I agree, Michelle.

Now if this thread was about the army shovelling snow in Tarana...

All Canadians are still suffering from PTSD* after that one.

 

* Past Toronto Snow Disaster.

On a more serious note, I'm in agreement generally with martin on this one.

I also consider that in a world where seeing a military checkpoint causes daily trauma to Palestinians, Iraqis, Afghans - all situations where our government is complicit in supporting or directly involved in the crimes against civilians - I find it hard to shed tears for New Yorkers that had a momentary flashback.

 

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

remind wrote:

I agree PTSD is not funny, and seeing how New Yorkers reacted, I cannot imagine, the severity of PTSD amongst those who are the receiving end of the USA's foreign policies.

This is hysteria. If you look at footage of the behaviour of people who have experienced traumatic experiences such as massive airial bombardment, you will see their behaviour is substantially different. I remember clearly people in Baghdad walking around, driving cars on major streets, and so on while the city was under direct military bombardment. This kind of behaviour was quite normal in London during the Blitz. The bombardment becomes mundane, People get acclimated to the idea that they might be next and there is nothing that they can do about it basically.

Look at raw footage from Gaza, you will see people walking about quite casually while explosions are going on right in their vicinity. The people who are shouting and running are those who are actually doing something. Look at the actual crowd footage from 9/11 and who will see a substantial difference in behaviour.

This is the behaviour of people who are seeing something unusual, not the behaviour of people who have become habituated to the prospect of sudden violent death.

To me this looks like people behaving how they think they ought to, "panicked", like in the hollywood movies they have seen, or in the film clips from the actual 9/11 event. A reaction no doubt to being constantly bombarded by a state media that is invoking constant paranoia through dire predictions and daily terroism threat warnings and so on.

ElizaQ ElizaQ's picture

That might be true Cueball, in terms of how people end up dealing with longterm and sustained events in order to survice, like the Blitz but that doesn't mean that they just deal with it as if it was no big deal, with no longterm effects.  If you talked with someone like my late Great Aunt who lived through the Blitz (she was a nurse so saw a lot of the death part of it) even fourty years after the fact when she heard a lowflying plane or loud noises her reaction was fear and an automatic reaction to head for the basement for safety and yes she was well aware that her reaction wasn't logical. It was emotional. She tried to make light of it the best she could.

  She wasn't able to live in a house that didn't have a basement though no matter how much she tried to rationalize it.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Right, head for the basement for safety. In this case they run towards the building, in the city, which would be the target, as opposed to staying where they were, by the docks, probably the safest place to be. That is one of the reasons it seemed artificial to me, like a stampede. I guess what I am saying is that the state has been shouting fire in a crowded theater for almost a decade now, and this is the result.

Jingles

Quote:
Do you have any empathy whatsoever for people who lived through a massacre of thousands and witnessed that event?

I do. Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. But Cueball already touched on that.

What I find funny is that having made an American cultural fetish out of 9/11, exploiting it at every turn, they become "traumatized" when their exploitation backfires. No one noticed the former Bush administration official's comments?

About the regular New Yorkers, what happened? They ran around like chickens with their heads cut off. After years of being told that Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI, the entire government security state apparatus is "keeping them safe" (mostly by massacring, torturing and raping Muslims overseas), they had no idea what to do in an actual (okay, simulated) emergency. They are so conditioned to look to a daddy protector, the saviour, that the all just stood waiting for the buildings to come down on their heads. If they were lucky, they'd get their deaths on camera phone and post it to youtube just in time.

To start the conspiracies rolling, I don't think that the Obamanites are really that stupid. To me, it looked a lot like New Yorkers waking up with a horse's head in their bed. It sent a message, all right.

Noise

I can see a few people (well, thousands) with PTSD having problems with this...but comon, this has well crossed the line into hysteria.  From the article, people evacuated in New York and New Jersey.

Quote:

after the planes prompted workers and residents to evacuate buildings in New York and New Jersey

 

New Jersey?  Seriously?  I'm surprised vigilantes didn't take to the streets firing their guns into the air in hopes of takin out a terrorist.

ElizaQ ElizaQ's picture

Cueball wrote:

Right, head for the basement for safety. In this case they run towards the building, in the city, which would be the target, as opposed to staying where they were, by the docks, probably the safest place to be. That is one of the reasons it seemed artificial to me, like a stampede. I guess what I am saying is that the state has been shouting fire in a crowded theater for almost a decade now, and this is the result.

  Yes, so I guess because they acted in what you see as an irrational manner that, that somehow makes the response artificial and somehow fake.  That's the point though. Fear and things like stress due to things like PSTD result in seemingly irrational behavior.  It's NOT a rational response.  Sure it might seem like a rational person would stand there and think well how do I remain safe and go through all of the logical thinking required to come to the best conclusion.  Some people are quite capable of that many aren't and respond with basic fight or flight instincts. When that sort of instinct kicks in it's similar to basic animal behavior. Hide, seek some sort of shelter. Get to cover, any cover.      There's a reason that people in positions of dealing with disasters or war actually get training in how to keep calm and cool in bad situations and have to learn things that run counter to natural instincts.  There's a reason you have to educate people that in a lightning storm the worst place to go is under a tree. I can attest having been caught in a particularly bad one the last place you 'feel' safe is out in the open lying on the ground. That patch of the trees over in the corner of the cut block looks damn appealing when in a situation like that even though rationally you know that's not true.

 So sure you may be correct, that people panicing here may be as much a result of state propoganda and a culture of fear that they have perpetuated.  That means that we should laugh at them? Oh look at the stupid irrational people, they just don't get what we do.  Yeah it's sure hilarious.

Unionist

The key thing here is that this is a boring non-story. Who cares? If there are significant numbers of people with untreated PTSD in New York as a result of 9/11 (which sounds like a rather exaggerated claim), they should go to Cuba where they can get free treatment. Other than that, I repeat - who actually cares? I feel for Italian earthquake and Katrina and Gaza and such survivors, not 9/11 flashback observers.

 

Ghislaine

Jingles wrote:

Quote:
Do you have any empathy whatsoever for people who lived through a massacre of thousands and witnessed that event?

I do. Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. But Cueball already touched on that.

And why not those in NY? You obviously know that is the massacre I was referring to. Because the American government supported and partook in actions we disagree with? How does this implicate every ordinary person just going to work? Our government is in Afghanistan.  Would you like to be considered representative of that just because you are Canadian?

Noise

Quote:
If there are significant numbers of people with untreated PTSD in New York as a result of 9/11 (which sounds like a rather exaggerated claim)

 

And New Jersey apparently. Any word as to when Pfizer will start marketting a drug to combat that multi-state PTSD epidemic?

 

Imagine if Katrina victims panicked like this everytime a storm blew up.

thorin_bane

I also have to agree with the hollywood effect. It the same reason people go to horror movies. Psychology is a strange beast, some like to do it for attention some llike to just be scared, because they think it is the proper response for those around them. They have been conditioned by movies to think this is a proper emotional and logical response and it isn't.

Might as watch cloverfield where someone manages to carry a hand held cam through the whole movie instead of running for their lives.

"Duh someone has to document this" at one point the guy gets eaten and his dim witted friend goes running back for the camera with was responsible for his friends demise....cloverfield was also crtisized for causeing trauma to people in the states because it showed the statue of liberty's head rolling down the street in a "terrorist like attack" of the city. People needed treatment because they saw a CGI head of the SoL roll down a street in a monster movie, while living in Iowa?

Sorry but people like to be scared. It gives them a reason to bond with the person next to them (despite the fact they would spit on them in any other event)....The pandemic is another example. Roche is making a fortune from the fear effect of the mild flu, selling it's tamiflu. Didn't we see this just a few years ago? People in Toronto were less worried about sars than people in the states. People like to be scared. The media tells them to be and they follow. I would argue that we probably have these varieties of flu every year, but because there is no media event it goes laregly undetected. Meaning they didn't check the strain just informed you to get liquids and stay in bed with your flu. People die of the flu all the time. Today was the first time it took someone in the states. It ratcheted up the fear factor. People are looking for Tamiflu like it is a security blanket against this. It might not even be able to conter this strain, nor is this strain the same one in Mexico, but it MIGHT be.

Reminds me of the Romans always worried about the barbarians at their gates.

remind remind's picture

I do agree with cueball, in the fact that these people have been triggered repeatedly, by the yelling of fire in a crowded theatre, so to speak.

However, what that has done is keep the PTSD near the surface, and thus we see people responding irrationally.

With PTSD, those suffering are never at the bottom line of the stress bell curve, where no stress is being experienced cognatively and emootionally.  They are perhaps midway up the curve into a postion where additional stress creates a rapid and irrational response.

Rational thinking abilities are directly related to the stress bell curve on the inverse scale.  So if one is halfway up the stress scale to begin with, they are only thinking half rationally, as it were. When the critical apex of stress is reached, and it does so rapidly with PTSD, then no ability to think rationally is present. Which is why drowning victims drown their rescuer.

In fact, even with people who do not have PTSD, when stress is increased, they have less of an ability to think rationally. Which is why constant anxiety building activities, is so effectual, as a component to successful propaganda shedding.

 

 

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Eliza, I am doubtful about your assertion that PTSD is particularly irrational. In fact, my understanding of the treatment of PTSD, and in this case I am refering to Jonathon Shay's work with Vietnam veterans, is that it largely concentrates on the rational basis of the condition and the expression of it.

I think I would interrogate this about idea about "irrational behaviour" and PTSD closely, and cautiously.

For example, for someone who went through the Vietnam experience, the fact that they have trouble sleeping because they have conditioned themselves to the possibility that someone will come up and slit their throat if they sleep, is actually quite rational, as is your Gram's instinct to head for the basement when she hears aircraft.... do you see what I mean?

Running toward the skyscrapers is not.

ElizaQ ElizaQ's picture

Cueball wrote:

I am doubtful about your assertion that PTSD is particularly irrational.

 That's not what I said. PTSD itself is not irrational. Actions and emotions that result from PTSD can seemingly be irrational in the context of whatever triggers the response.  I know someone who several years ago ran into a building that was on fire and helped get some teenagers out. It was a very tramatic situation for all involved. For at least a year afterward even something as basic as the smell of a burning match when a candle was being lit would trigger stress reaction. Burning anything like incense in the house was a problem. Even being at a party with BBQ was difficult because the smells triggered an emotional, stress, fear response to the point where the person had to leave.   In context, what is the big deal about cooking some burgers? It's not like there's some sort of big threat like the orginial fire so why get worked up about it.  That they had some PTSD type symptoms after experiencing something like that isn't irrational but how they manifested in a response to a trigger doesn't always seem rational.  

 The worst part and why something like PTSD is so hard is that the person can know intellectually that the responses aren't logical, aren't rational in the context they're happening in and realize that getting all stressed about burgers cooking is just stupid and idiotic and it doesn't seem to matter in terms of what happens at the time.

Michelle

I completely agree with those who said that the overblown reaction was pure hysteria.  But whether it was rational or not, or whether their behaviour was cued by action movies and the media or not, the point is, they felt it, and an awful LOT of them felt it.

New Jersey is basically a commuter suburb for NYC.  Okay, not completely.  But a lot of people who live in New Jersey work in New York.  And New Jersey is just across the river (so the surrounding NJ towns could probably see the planes too).  So it's not surprising that the hysteria extended into New Jersey.

Snert Snert's picture

I think a similar case could be made that if a woman who's never personally been attacked by a stranger feels fearful crossing a dark parkinglot, it's probably a case of seeing too many hyped-up media stories about strangers in bushes.

With the big difference being that I doubt anyone would be snickering at her for being duped by the media.

ElizaQ ElizaQ's picture

Michelle wrote:

I completely agree with those who said that the overblown reaction was pure hysteria.  But whether it was rational or not, or whether their behaviour was cued by action movies and the media or not, the point is, they felt it, and an awful LOT of them felt it.

New Jersey is basically a commuter suburb for NYC.  Okay, not completely.  But a lot of people who live in New Jersey work in New York.  And New Jersey is just across the river (so the surrounding NJ towns could probably see the planes too).  So it's not surprising that the hysteria extended into New Jersey.

Yes I agree. You just it explained some of what I've been trying to say but more succinctly. It happened for whatever reasons and I don't think it's something to laugh about or make fun of.

remind remind's picture

I made my last post beforew I read this below of cue's.

Cueball wrote:
Eliza, I am doubtful about your assertion that PTSD is particularly irrational. In fact, my understanding of the treatment of PTSD, and in this case I am refering to Jonathon Shay's work with Vietnam veterans, is that it largely concentrates on the rational basis of the condition and the expression of it.

I think I would interrogate this about idea about "irrational behaviour" and PTSD closely, and cautiously.

For example, for someone who went through the Vietnam experience, the fact that they have trouble sleeping because they have conditioned themselves to the possibility that someone will come up and slit their throat if they sleep, is actually quite rational, as is your Gram's instinct to head for the basement when she hears aircraft.... do you see what I mean?

Running toward the skyscrapers is not.

It is irrational cue, very. Yes, one can rationalize the behaviour as to why reactions take the form they do, but it is entirely based upon fight or flight instints, driven by instant responses that are located in the limbic brain. Cognative thinking may come after the fact, either sooner or later, and in some cases a very long while.

Your example about inability to sleep is a poor one, a better one would be their hearing a car backfire, or a wine cork pop, and  their running screamming for cover, or to get a gun and shoot back.

Moreover, those with PTSD have a variety of reasons for their inability to sleep.

You have very little insight in PTSD cue, not your fault though, there is very little out there available that can easily afford one the understanding of what is happening  and at work, in an articulate manner. Though I hope soon to have that taken care of.

Caissa

Almost half of individuals who use outpatient mental-health services have been found to suffer from PTSD. As evidenced by the occurrence of stress in many individuals in the United States in the days following the 2001 terrorist attacks, not being physically present at a traumatic event does not guarantee that one cannot suffer from traumatic stress that can lead to the development of PTSD.

More can be found here: http://www.medicinenet.com/posttraumatic_stress_disorder/article.htm

Noise

Eliza:

Quote:
 I know someone who several years ago ran into a building that was on fire and helped get some teenagers out. It was a very tramatic situation for all involved. For at least a year afterward even something as basic as the smell of a burning match when a candle was being lit would trigger stress reaction. Burning anything like incense in the house was a problem.

 

Would you feel the same had the person developed this from a fire that they saw on a film featuring a different city?

 

 

It still seems quite funny, ultimately it was done by the US to it's own people...it's like watching a jumpy friend scare themselves shitless.

Fidel

That should put the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_tension]fear of Jeebus[/url] back into them.

 

Of course, [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/13/rumsfeld-on-2006-election_n_101..."The correction for that...[loss of fear of false flag threat] is another attack"[/url] - Donald "the Don" Rumsfeld

Cueball Cueball's picture

remind wrote:
You have very little insight in PTSD cue, not your fault though, there is very little out there available that can easily afford one the understanding of what is happening  and at work, in an articulate manner. Though I hope soon to have that taken care of.

So much for reading extensively on the subject. And here I was thinking that Judith Herman and Jonathon Shay were excelent writers able to express clearly what it is that their decades long research into the subject afforded. You seem very sure of yourself when you say it is irrational. Perhaps some time you can meet Judith Herman and ask her yourself if she would assert that fears triggered by abuse such as rape were "irrational," categorically as you just have.

My personal belief is that she would be a little more cautious about making such an assertion.

 

Noise

Errr, are you contending that the military purposefully did this to re-instill some fear and allowed Caldera to take the blame for it?

Fidel

Deterrence is the art of producing in the collective mind of sheeple .. the fear of false flag gladio. Repeat if necessary. - Dr Fidel Strangerlove

remind remind's picture

Cueball wrote:
remind wrote:
You have very little insight in PTSD cue, not your fault though, there is very little out there available that can easily afford one the understanding of what is happening  and at work, in an articulate manner. Though I hope soon to have that taken care of.

So much for reading extensively on the subject. And here I was thinking that Judith Herman and Jonathon Shay were excelent writers able to express clearly what it is that their decades long research into the subject afforded. You seem very sure of yourself when you say it is irrational. Perhaps some time you can meet Judith Herman and ask her yourself if she would assert that fears triggered by abuse such as rape were "irrational," categorically as you just have.

My personal belief is that she would be a little more cautious about making such an assertion.

I did not make such assertations, let alone categorically,  I said the instantainous reactions were irrational and can not be predicted ,  PTSD  fears, symptoms and actions can be rationalized  for the limbic protection responses that they are. You are misconstruing what they and I am saying.

Again, I go back to the example, of when a drowning person drowns their rescuer. There is NO rational thought process available, it is a completely irrational reaction/response triggered by the limbic brain's fight or flight system of self protection.

Ghislaine

Noise wrote:

Eliza:

Quote:
 I know someone who several years ago ran into a building that was on fire and helped get some teenagers out. It was a very tramatic situation for all involved. For at least a year afterward even something as basic as the smell of a burning match when a candle was being lit would trigger stress reaction. Burning anything like incense in the house was a problem.

 

Would you feel the same had the person developed this from a fire that they saw on a film featuring a different city?

 

 

It still seems quite funny, ultimately it was done by the US to it's own people...it's like watching a jumpy friend scare themselves shitless.

How is it funny? It is nothing like watching a jumpy friend scare themselves shitless. Jesus. Governments do oppressive things the world over to their own people! That does make the individuals' reactions funny.  

ElizaQ ElizaQ's picture

Cueball wrote:

remind wrote:
You have very little insight in PTSD cue, not your fault though, there is very little out there available that can easily afford one the understanding of what is happening  and at work, in an articulate manner. Though I hope soon to have that taken care of.

So much for reading extensively on the subject. And here I was thinking that Judith Herman and Jonathon Shay were excelent writers able to express clearly what it is that their decades long research into the subject afforded. You seem very sure of yourself when you say it is irrational. Perhaps some time you can meet Judith Herman and ask her yourself if she would assert that fears triggered by abuse such as rape were "irrational," categorically as you just have.

My personal belief is that she would be a little more cautious about making such an assertion.

 

 

She didn't say that having it or understanding why the reactions happen are irrational.  That's not the point that I or Remind are making. Having PTSD and experiencing behavior related to PTSD is not irrational. The reasons it happens aren't irrational. The reasons it happens ARE quite rational in the context of what originally caused it.  It's the resulting reactions and behavior that can seem quite irrational to the observer,  just like you keep saying that fearful people funning towards a building for cover in that situation is irrational.  Your the observer here. That's what I'm talking about.  Running towards a building for cover might be perfectly rational in the context of someone who is experiencing the fear and stress at that time.

And I'm not just talking about what I read in books. I've experience post tramatic stress myself. I know what it's like. I know what the mind does despite any rational intellectualizing.  There are quite rational reasons for what caused it. I know why. I know how. I even know what is at play when something triggers it.  My behavior though when that trigger happens would seem quite irrational to someone who saw me experiencing it and likely if they didn't know me, or the reasons why that particular thing was a trigger they wouldn't understand it and it's something that would make little sense to them.    Once the intial reaction happens and the rational mind comes back into play it seems quite silly and irrational to me as well.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Then perhaps you should have said something along the lines of "appears irrational" as oppsed to "It is irrational cue, very." That sounds pretty categorical to me.

Cueball Cueball's picture

In anycase, in our current example, I submit that the state has been traumatizing New Yorkers for some time now, and seperating the actual incident of 9/11 and the immediate impacts upon persons directly affected by them, and those affected in a secondary manner through the use of the incident as the basis state propaganda, deliberately intended to instill fear in the population, is very hard to distinguish. 

In fact, I think it is a bit of a diservice to those who were really involved, in as much as they saw people die, or had friends and family die, or collegues and whatever who died, with "New Yorkers" generally, as if the real impacts in terms of traumatization are somehow simillar.

As far as I can tell the real trauma experienced by Americans generally was not direct trauma, but the trauma of having their bubble of invincibility popped. Imagine a child burning its hand on a hot stove for the first time.

Pages

Topic locked