i met a 9/11 widow this weekend

[unblock]

i'm actually not sure which is more surprising -- that i actually met someone who was directly affected by the events of that day, or that it took nearly a decade to do so. after all, i work in the area, in the financial industry, i saw the towers burning, i saw the smoke and debris cloud work its way up into midtown manhattan. i've known many could have been victims -- myself included, in a sense; some of my previous commutes took me through the towers, and my brother used to work near the top of one of them.

but soooo many people passed through those buildings that stories about, gee, if it had happened a year earlier or whatever, it could have been me, well, those stories are a dime a dozen.

here i was having dinner with some friends, and one of the guests is a widow because her husband was one of the 3,000 lost that day.

wow.

turns out she was pregnant at the time, and i also met her adorable daughter. our kids had plenty of fun playing together.

the mother was not the sort to volunteer this information, and actually none of us knew it (not even the host) until the daughter, who is just of the age to learn and understand why she has no father, told our host what she knew of the story.

daddy went to work to provide for mommy and her....
some very bad people did a very bad thing....
and daddy couldn't ever come home again....

can you imagine?

these people live with it every day. they can't get away from the news, the politicians, the bumper stickers, the wars, the stories about how greedy the 9/11 families were.

she was an art exhibit recently and there was a painting of the towers ablaze. she couldn't believe it, and they wouldn't remove it even after she complained, until she said, "hey, that's a painting of my husband's body being roasted in there".


one interesting part of the conversation centered around the money the families got, or the amounts they supposedly got. much of what got reported was more about cantor fitzgerald, the company that lost about 90% of its employees that day. because of the nature of the company, they had a HUGE amount of capital and comparatively few employees. they led the way, very publicly, in treating their 9/11 families rather well. some huge amounts were involved, and it got a lot of media attention.

but the vast majority of the other employers simply stole the good image created by cantor fitzgerald. whether they were in a position or not to be generous, most of them behaved pretty much how we would expect corporations to behave -- they paid out as little as they felt they could get away with, and thanks to cantor fitzgerald and the media, that wasn't nearly as much as we were led to believe. of course, i don't have a peek into her checking account, but judging from her car and her attire i have to believe her.



a lot of memories brought came back to me this weekend. but mostly, i got some grounding on the whole politics of 9/11. there were real people directly affected on that day, and those events have dramatically changed our politics and our foreign policy. all these things were done in the name of people like the family i met this weekend.

they didn't ask for it, and never wanted any of it.

[pacalo]

1. Very interesting. Thanks for sharing your evening's experience.

[aquart]

2. What do you mean "thanks to Cantor Fitzgerald"?

MILLIONS were donated for those families of the 3000. MILLIONS. Are you saying that Cantor Fitzgerald stole it for their own? That they lied and took too much so that others got too little? WHAT CRIME DID CANTOR FITZGERALD COMMIT that you blame them so specifically?

[Common Sense Party]

3. Read it again. n/t

[TomClash]

12. Reading is Fundamental

OP never blamed CF. Re-read the post.

[unblock]

13. just to be clear...

cantor fitzgerald, from everything i know, did the right thing. they were in a position to do so comfortably, and took care of their families. not blaming them for anything.

the problem was that the media then hyped what they did, permitting OTHER companies to avoid doing anything approaching what cantor fitzgerald did while maintaining the IMAGE of having taken care of the families -- to the point that most people think the 9/11 families were greedy for wanting even more.

[ejpoeta]

25. the op said that cantor fitzgerald did the responsible thing and took care

of the families. OTHER COMPANIES gave as little as they could get away with and thanks to the media lumping all the companies together, the other companies got the good press without having to do the responsible thing.

[jimlup]

4. Would you feel as effected if you meet a widow in Afganistan

Who's husband had been killed by US bombs? Or perhaps a child who had lost both parents to US bombs? Or perhaps a mother who had lost a child to US bombs?

9/11 only affected us because we are not used to the events being so close. It wasn't unprecedented in scale or scope only that it happened to a Western Imperialist country.

[riderinthestorm]

6. I can only speak for myself but I was involved with RAWA long before our involvement.

I'm a firm believer in "like attracts like" and through my work with rape crisis centers and battered women's shelters, the situation in Afghanistan is no mystery to those who were involved in women's issues long before the US "officially" became involved. Where I lived for 25 years was a common refugee port in the US for evangelical orgs and I've met more than my fair share of Afghan women.

[girl_interrupted]

7. I think anyone with a heart would feel compassion for both

Doesn't matter if you are in the states or another country...a loss is a loss, especially of a husband or a child.

[unblock]

14. i've met widows before; all circumstances are different

we've had loss in my own family from the holocaust, i'm no stranger to the phenomenom. certainly, one can't help but feel for anyone who has suffered such great loss regardless of the circumstance.

until i hear the particular pains of an afghan widow, i don't suppose i'll know for sure, but of course i'd listen with an open heart and feel for her. i imagine i would feel even angrier at the power structure of my country that rains death on innocents for vague or ill-conceived reasons.

yes, 9/11 has has a peculiar effect on the american psyche. but remember, i SAW it. it's one thing to meet a widow. it's another thing to remember very clearly the day and the event from a decade earlier where the person died. imagine seeing a car crash on the side of the road and later meeting the widow whose husband died in that crash.

[riderinthestorm]

5. I also know a 9/11 widow and I'll take this discussion in a new direction

she doesn't want the Muslim community center anywhere near there. She sees it as religiously biased politically pandering theatre. She doesn't want ANY new religious centers to spring up there. She wants neutral, non-religious centers (if any). She doesn't care about any religious groups that have already existed in the area to leave but now her belief is that NO more religious centers should be there (She's another Cantor Fitzgerald widow and a devout Jew).

It makes a difference in your perspective when you know someone doesn't it? There are DUers who want to judge, blame, critique, soliloquize but until you meet someone up close and personal, who was directly impacted, it's hard to remain so impartial.

I can't remain silent on this board afterwards. It depends of course how the discussion at the dinner table evolved, I can only speak for myself and how I now feel, but it is something isn't it?

[jberryhill]

9. She is entitled to her opinion, but does not get a personal veto over the Constitution

Some people are racists as a consequence of bad things done to them by a member of another race.

While certainly psychologically understandable, it does not become a basis for public policy.

[Hissyspit]

21. The people who want to build the center did not make it "politically pandering theatre."

[Hissyspit]

8. What right did she have to demand an artwork be removed?

She had a choice to try and understand the artist and artwork or leave the presence of the artwork or impinge on someone's freedom of expression and she went with impinge on freedom of expression? What was the nature of the artwork? Why was it using the subject matter? What was the context or theme of the show? Was the artist consulted?

[girl_interrupted]

11. I think the problem here, is that a death of a loved one

is usual private. These families will never be afforded that luxury. She probably had no right to ask that it be removed. but I can understand where she is coming from. It will be 10 years this September, and still the events of that day are played over and over in graphic detail, for anyone to see. And while it may be a work of art to the artist, to her its just another reminder of the horrific way her husband died. Not the artist's fault and not hers...just different viewpoints.

[unblock]

15. wow, that's really sensitive.

any patron has the right to complain and passionately ask for changes for personal reasons.

i think more to the point is the they would have been within their rights to ignore her strenuous request, if they didn't care to be sensitive to the unique situation of an unexpected patron.

if the president came in, they would have bent over backwards to do anything he wanted.
if some famous actor had walked in and said it was one degree too cold, they would have turned up the heat.
if paul mccartney had walked in and said to turn off the music because they're playing someone else's version of his song and he hates it, they would have done so.

but yes, they would have been in their rights to ignore her request, insensitive as that may be.

but no doubt that any patron/customer has the right to complain about something that hits so close to home.

[Hissyspit]

16. You're equating censorship with changing the climate control??

Really?? This was an art exhibit. I don't know the nature of the exhibit or the situation. That's why I asked more questions. I have a feeling the OP ia not giving us a correct description of the situation. But the implication is she shut down someone's right to free speech. Patrons and customers?? Sensitive? You're damn right I'm sensitive to censorship of art.

[unblock]

17. she hardly "shut it down".

they removed the offending piece for the time she was there.

i'm quite certain that they put it back in place as soon as she left.


this is hardly censorship. reasonable accommodation for a special patron is more like it.

the situation makes you think about how it must feel from the families' point of view, to see images and circumstances of the death of their loved ones all over the place toyed with publicly, used for political agendas and private gain (even in the case of art), and so on.

most people who become widows or widowers don't have to face this particular kind of pain, and we should all be aware and sensitive to that. i'm not saying that we shouldn't talk about 9/11, or that artists and comedians or whomever shouldn't use it as material. it was a national tragedy and we all have much to say about it. but it's also a very personal and private tragedy for a few, and no one should be cavalier or oblivious to that, either.

[Hissyspit]

18. Hmm.

What was the nature of the exhibit? Who didn't get to see the artwork during the time she had it removed?

Do we remove gay civil rights-themed art because someone who is homophobic enters the room? Not an entirely analogous example, of course, but the same idea. You seemed to imply that it was offensive that the exhibitors/curators would not remove the work. Imagine that. Was this a private viewing where she was a guest of honor? I can see her making a REQUEST (as opposed to a demand) in that situation. Did she just walk in off the street and refuse to leave the room and make a scene? (You really did not give us much information to understand the situation with.)

Sorry. She does NOT get to act like an authoritarian (apparently) because her husband was murdered. You know who would like to censor art? al Qaeda.

[unblock]

19. wow. now you're likening a 9/11 widow to the terrorists who murdered 3000, including her husband!

unbelievable!

doesn't SHE have freedom of speech? doesn't SHE have a right to feel offended and point it out?


if you think this is censorship, your beef is with the people putting on the exhibit, who did what she requested, rather than insist that the artist's right of expression is greater than any consideration for the feelings of customers. they could have simply asked her to leave if they were of a mind to do so. but no one has a right to tell her to shut up and stuff her feelings. censorship is not the making of a request, censorship is the actual removal.


i don't know the exact circumstances of the exhibit other than it was not a 9/11-themed exhibit. she avoids those; this picture caught her very much by surprise.

[Hissyspit]

20. No, I'm not. I'm pointing out irony based on the issue at hand.

Yes, she has the right to be offended and express that. That is NOT the same as demanding it be removed because she is upset.

What does this mean?: She was at an art exhibit where the burning towers were in one of the images and "she couldn't believe it."

Hunh? Is that true or just your interpretation or miswording? Why couldn't she believe that some would use those images in an artwork? That doesn't even make sense. Was there something about this exhibit that would preclude the subject matter from being used? Many, many artworks - good, bad, moving, subtle, graphic - have used this subject matter for the past ten years, although you don't make it clear when this incident occurred. (Rereading your post, I'm assuming it was years ago.) And it HAS been ten years. Again, I ask, what was the nature of this exhibit? Did it have a theme? Was she invited there as a guest?

Censoring an artwork from a public exhibit it a serious matter.

[unblock]

22. sorry, i don't have any more details on the exhibit.

when she said "i couldn't believe it", she wasn't saying she couldn't believe that images of the towers exist or anything like that, she was merely using an expression of surprise to unexpectedly turn and be confronted with an image of the incident in which her husband was killed.

i'm sure she understands that such images exist publicly and are important for other people to contextualize their own experience and so on, but imagine trying to get some kind of closure after the loss of your spouse, but when it's in a circumstance when you the public constantly reopens the wound.


i have no idea why we're talking about rights at all here. of course artists have a right to put on whatever they want, but customers have the right to complain as well. it's not about rights, it's about decency within those rights.

[defendandprotect]

10. Amazing that the Russians never thought of doing what those 19 did ... ???

Millions of questions about 9/11 --

If they had told us that the Russians did this, we'd still be :rofl: --

sadly -- very sadly!!

[snooper2]

23. You never miss a beat..

never miss a beat...reliable. We like that in our posters :)

[kaiden]

24. If I remember it correctly, the only employees of Cantor Fitzgerald

who DIDN'T die on September 11th were the ones who had traveled to Denver for the Monday Night Football game between the Broncos and the Giants.

[eilen]

26. My cousin died on the first plane

she was one of the flight attendants. Her voice was played over and over and over again as the recording of her conversation with the AA --- "I see water I see buildings, Omygod OMYGOD! and the phone cut off. CNN played it and played it and played it.

Even remembering it today gives me physical pain.

I saw a picture of Mohammed Atta in the paper and thought-- That was one of the last faces Amy saw, instead of her husband or her children. That Bastard. The thing is, she wasn't supposed to be there. She was covering for a coworker who needed the day off, was sick.

She was not my blood cousin, but her Dad and Mom were my godparents (Aunt Ellie and Uncle Bill Todd) and we were kids together. Both our parents divorced and we grew up. My Dad used to joke about attending her wedding: " A Sweeney-Todd wedding, everyone kept their head."

I wanted revenge. I don't know, I felt betrayed by the government when it was published that these men actually trained here, etc. I was not rational.

So. a few pictures of the towers ablaze. Artwork, quilts etc. They really don't bother me. I hope people still paint, collage and draw them so no one forgets.

It wasn't nothing. It wasn't everything. But it broke my heart.

Every year I visit the memorial we have at our fairgrounds and cry a little.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeline_Amy_Sweeney

[boycottfaux]

27. I have a similar story . .

I work on Dey Street off Church St., across from the World
Trade.  I too had never met a family member who lost someone
in the WTC until recently . .

Having my hair cut, all the women in the salon talking about
the 'ground zero mosque'.  We're all talking at once and IMO,
which I voiced, they had a right to build the cultural center
which in fact was already open and being used as a
mosque/cultural center . .

Arguing against the mosque was a women, very adamant against
the Muslims and their mosque, as were alot of the regulars at
the salon.  I certainly was in the minority.  Turns out after
our lengthy debate, someone whispers in my ear "she lost
her son in 9/11" . .

NOW WHAT?

I stood my ground, I said I apologize for this discussion, had
I known I would not have given my opinion to cause you more
grief, but I stand by my opinion, etc. (with the usual Saudis
were flying the planes, etc)

What do you say to a woman who has lost her son in Towers?  We
don't feel her pain.  Had I known, I would have kept my big
mouth shut, but I couldn't put the toothpaste back in the tube
but had I been asked, and I had known she lost her son, I
would have just said 'I don't have an opinion.'

Before I left I took her hand and really apologized, from the
heart and wished her peace . .