In response to Michelle Werness and Stephanie Lichter’s letter in Thursday’s Daily, “Sept. 11 should be about remembrance”:

Werness and Lichter’s claim that Sept. 11 should be strictly about remembrance is both sanctimonious and facile. While it could have become a day of remembrance, for many it has become something else. Instead of an innocent national tragedy, our conduct in the world since then has painted it as a national disgrace. That day marks when a country abandoned temperance and reason and chose impetuous violence instead.

I find it perfectly reasonable that a newspaper would run a story about the injustices we have carried out since that day. If I were a victim of that attack, I would not expect journalistic inquiry to be suspended in favor of idle remembrance. Furthermore, I would be offended if my memory was repeatedly invoked to justify the trampling of civil liberty and countless war crimes throughout the world. Wouldn’t they prefer if their memory was instead used to right injustice and promote peace? One way to do that is for the press to do its job, to inquire into real issues that stem from the terrorist attacks.

As for the people Werness and Lichter called “sick-minded,” perhaps they are. But perhaps it’s also true that some are just fed up with the sickening things that have been done in the name of Sept. 11, and know of no other way to show it than through satire and bad humor. That more than anything illustrates how Sept. 11 makes many feel – frustrated, disoriented, aghast and left wondering what has happened to their country.

Adam Faircloth

Senior

Political science