The upcoming five-year anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks is certain to bring with it scores of retrospectives, but perhaps none so powerful as the one planned by CNN.com.
One way CNN plans to memorialize the anniversary is by offering Internet viewers a replay, in real time, of the day’s events as they were reported on the cable network on Sept. 11, 2001. The replay begins at 8:30 a.m., shortly before the first report of an airplane hitting the first World Trade Center tower, and continues until midnight.
I recently watched the movie “United 93” — released on DVD today — and even though the film was a dramatization with actors recreating the events of the day, it took me back to a Sept. 10, 2001, world.
Viewers of the movie were reminded how unconventional the attacks were. The fact that there were multiple planes used and that the planes were not being held until demands could be met was something it took a while to process because it was a form of hijacking never before seen. On Sept. 10, we were largely ignorant of the nature of the enemy we faced.
As powerful as I found “United 93” to be, I can’t even imagine how viewing the actual real-time coverage of that day will affect me. I will be watching, though, at least part of the replay. I will watch because I want to remember what it felt like, if just for a moment, to live in a Sept. 10 world.
I want to experience the feeling of utter disbelief that anyone would fly a plane full of innocent people into a building full of thousands just going about their daily jobs. That blissful ignorance I once knew died five years ago.
The events of that day changed not only the way we had to look at the world, but it changed the ways we had to react to potential threats. We were caught by surprise that day.
We knew the World Trade Center had been attacked before and we knew Osama bin Laden was determined to attack America. We just did not realize how well organized, or more importantly, how determined and bloodthirsty, those in the jihadist movement were. We did not honor the threat they presented to us.
I hope many Americans do take the time during the next week to watch movies like “United 93” and to view the replay of the news coverage that day. It is not only a way to honor the memory of those lost, but it is a necessary reminder of what we face today.
Those critical of the way the president has approached the war on terror should realize that in many ways, including through daily threat assessments, he has lived in the moment of Sept. 11 for the past five years. Everything he has done since then must be viewed through the prism of the events of that day for them to be considered in proper context.
That is not to say that considering the events of Sept. 11 will cause critics of the president to reconsider their criticism. It might, however, help them to understand the reasoning behind various decisions, even if they don’t agree with them.
The decision to invade Iraq was not made due to a connection between Saddam and the Sept. 11 attacks, but it did have everything to do with Sept. 11 and the commitment made to prevent a future attack.
On that day, we wondered why the dots were not connected. The president was determined that never again would our refusal to take action against a known threat result in the slaughter of innocent Americans. It is not yet clear which of the threats believed to exist from Saddam’s WMD program were real, and which were faulty intelligence.
We may never fully know. The reports the president received from our intelligence sources, though, as well as from foreign sources, warned us that a threat existed. When viewed in the shadow of Sept. 11, that was a threat this president was not willing to ignore.
What Americans will have to decide in a couple of months, and again in 2008, is how they want their leaders to react to threats when they become known.
Jeff Harrell put it this way: “The question, come election season, is whether we want our leaders to be overly timid and unwilling to commit American force when threats loom, inviting another Sept. 11 or worse, or whether we want them to be overly zealous and run the risk of acting decisively when it may not be absolutely necessary. The obvious answer, of course, is ‘neither,’ but real life doesn’t work like that. It’s going to be one or the other, and we voters have to choose.”
Regardless of the ultimate choice voters make, the experience of Sept. 11 will certainly influence that decision.
Lorie Byrd is a member of The Examiner’s Blog Board of Contributors and blogs at Wizbangblog.com.
